Tok Ib
Tok Ib
Core theme
CHAPTER 2 Core theme: Knowledge and the Knower
Optional themes
CHAPTER 3 Knowledge and Technology
CHAPTER 4 Knowledge and Language
CHAPTER 5 Knowledge and Indigenous Societies
CHAPTER 6 Knowledge and Religion
CHAPTER 7 Knowledge and Politics
Areas of knowledge
CHAPTER 8 Mathematics
CHAPTER 9 The Natural Sciences
CHAPTER 10 The Human Sciences
CHAPTER 11 History
CHAPTER 12 The Arts
Glossary
Index
Acknowledgements
Equally true is the fact that humans have control over many realities and can change them at will: we build buildings
that didn’t exist and tear buildings down so that they no longer exist. We name our children, and our children can go
down to the local courthouse and legally change their names, once they come of age. We can define ‘planet’ in such
a way that it includes Pluto, and then, when many hundreds more objects like Pluto are discovered, we can redefine
Scope
When you examine the scope of a particular area, you will be exploring questions about what the content is of that
particular area. What makes something natural science rather than religion? What do we mean when we talk about
technology and knowledge? What is technology? When we are exploring scope, we are also exploring the effects of
that knowledge in the world – what role it plays in human experience and why it is valuable to us.
Perspectives
Perspectives is one of the 12 core course concepts, which you will read about in Chapter 1. You will find a detailed
discussion of what we mean by perspectives beginning on page 25. In general, however, your perspective is the way
in which you view something. It is shaped by all of your experience. Different people have different perspectives,
and throughout the course you will be exploring the ways in which different perspectives shape how knowledge is
made and how it is understood and valued.
Ethics
Finally, for each topic that you study over the course of your programme, you will consider the role that ethics plays
in the shaping and sharing of knowledge. To say that something is ethical is to say that it is the right thing to do,
according to some principle. The methods of each area, for example, are shaped by what is considered to be ethical
practice. Ethics is an important and extensive subject, so we have made available online a short ‘Introduction to
Ethical Theory’ to introduce to you what we mean when we talk about ethics, different systems of ethical decision
making and basic principles of ethics as they relate to knowledge. You can access this information using the QR
code in the margin.
ACTIVITY
Each chapter contains activities to help you check your understanding of the chapter content and to
practise working with the ideas in that chapter. Remember that TOK thinking is a new kind of work for
most students. You may not be accustomed to exploring ideas which do not always have one clear ‘right’
answer. Over time, you will develop the skills needed in order to be able to differentiate ideas in a
complex and sophisticated way, as well as to notice and explain the nuances of a wide variety of
knowledge-making situations.
Learner profile
Questions relating the content to attributes of the IB Learner profile are included in the margins
throughout.
DEEPER THINKING
Sometimes TOK presents us with conceptual issues or dilemmas that need to be thought about in a bit
more depth. Deeper thinking boxes are devoted to working through some of these points in the detail
they require.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Concept connection boxes highlight the relevance of one or more of the 12 key concepts to the topic
being discussed. Similar boxes are used to highlight connections to the core theme.
CASE STUDY
Real-life examples are drawn on throughout the book to illustrate the issues raised by the TOK course.
TOK trap
The TOK course deals with a lot of potentially difficult ideas and many students make the same mistakes
in their approaches to these. We have tried to identify some of these, so that you can avoid them.
Assessment advice
Guidance relating to the two assessment components – the essay and the exhibition – is labelled
Assessment advice.
There are also a number of suggestions about how you could link your TOK studies to the other two core elements
of the Diploma Programme – creativity, activity, service (CAS) and the Extended essay (EE) – interspersed
throughout the book.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What shapes my perspective as a knower?
When you come to write your TOK essay, you will find that the prescribed title you choose will be a knowledge
question. Your essay will be an exploration of how that question can be answered in different knowledge-generating
situations, so your ability to think about knowledge questions in a sophisticated way is a skill you need to develop
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
throughout your course.
There is one set of knowledge questions for TOK which is intended for student use directly: these are the questions
from which you will choose when the time comes to prepare your TOK exhibition – the internal assessment (IA) for
the course. There is a list of 35 TOK IA prompts, and you will choose one of those as the basis for your exhibition.
The TOK curriculum guide recommends that you complete your TOK exhibition with reference to the core theme or
one of the optional themes. Therefore, we have included examples of those prompts, such as the one in the margin,
at various places in the relevant chapters of the book where the discussion relates to those questions. We have not
suggested any answers to those questions, for the same reason that we have not provided any responses to more
general knowledge questions: you will need to learn how to develop complex responses which approach the
question from different perspectives. The TOK skills book Theory of Knowledge: Skills for Success by John Sprague
and published by Hodder Education, offers more detailed advice about how to respond to knowledge questions, how
to prepare for the two assessments and how your study of the content in this book will help you complete those
assessments effectively.
IA prompt
32 What makes a good explanation?
A very important point for you to understand and remember is that the concept connections and the IA prompts that
you encounter in each chapter are examples only. You should understand that the concepts and prompts in any given
chapter are not the only concepts or prompts which could be explored through the content in that chapter. Indeed, it
is very possible that every one of the 12 concepts can be connected to every one of the themes and areas of
knowledge in the course – that is why they are considered to be core concepts. The same might be true of the 35 IA
prompts. Use the connections that you see in any given chapter to spur your thinking, but then challenge yourself to
explore how the concepts and prompts which are not included in that particular chapter might be relevant and
helpful in developing a sophisticated understanding of that part of the course.
The IB Theory of Knowledge course is unlike any other course you are likely to have taken. If you engage your full
energy and attention, you will be rewarded with an ability that every human being should have: the ability to control
your life, as much as is humanly possible. You will know which people and which sources of information you can
trust and which you cannot. People will not be able to deliberately mislead you with false information, you will not
be taken in by erroneous ‘facts’, and you will be able to make decisions about what to do for yourself and for your
community which will have real power, because they will be based in reality. No one can ask for more from any
schooling. Enjoy!
Learner profile
Thinkers
How do the course concepts help us to identify and understand patterns of knowledge-making across
TOK topics?
Certainty is a term that we use to describe knowledge that has been established beyond any reasonable doubt.
Strictly speaking, when we say we ‘know’ something, we are saying that we are ‘certain’ that it is true. Calling
something ‘certain’ is not the same thing as saying that it is ‘absolutely certain’. To call something ‘absolute’ is to
say that there are no qualifications whatsoever, no exceptions, and not even the tiniest amount of uncertainty. The
standard for certainty is confidence beyond reasonable doubt, whereas the standard for absolute certainty is an
assertion that we know right now that no evidence can ever arise which would cause us to have to revise the claim.
One common error that people make is to think that if we don’t know something with absolute certainty, then we
don’t know it at all. In fact, most of what we know is beyond any reasonable dispute but is not absolutely certain.
One example of something that we know, that is, one thing we are certain about, is that all living things eventually
die. We cannot, however, claim that we know this with absolute certainty. The reason that we know that all living
things die eventually is that we have observed this fact over and over. We have evidence from thousands, if not
millions, of species spanning millions of years. We have scientific understanding of the nature of biological entities
and of what happens to them over time. There has never been a single instance of an immortal being. The conclusion
that all living things die is an inductive conclusion: that is, it is a conclusion based on observation of many
individual instances. From those instances, we develop a pattern which becomes the knowledge claim. We are
convinced beyond reasonable doubt by the massed evidence that all living things die. All living things have so far
died, and we expect that to continue in the future. Scientists are particular, however, and they never make claims that
are not precise. We do not say that it is absolutely certain that all living things will die because we cannot, with
absolute certainty, predict the future based on the past. This is called the problem of induction.
We can assert that all living things have died, and we expect that all living things in the future will die. However, we
cannot guarantee that that will happen to every living thing forever because we have not seen every living thing
forever, and we never will be able to see every living thing that ever exists. If something living sometime in the
future were to turn out to be immortal, we would have to adjust our thinking. Acknowledging that we are certain, but
not absolutely certain, is our way of acknowledging the remote possibility that future evidence could cause a change
in our knowledge. Notice, however, that if something immortal did show up one day, we would be unlikely to
suddenly throw out our whole idea about the mortal nature of all living things. Instead, we would begin studying the
question to try to determine what accounts for the apparently immortal being. Imagine that it were to transpire that a
creature which was apparently human was 600 years old. We would want to know how that was possible. Avenues
of study would include investigating the physical make-up of the ‘person’ to see if there were differences between
them and other humans. Perhaps we could identify a mutation. Perhaps the ‘person’ would turn out to be some other
species altogether, or a being from some other planet. We would also have the problem of establishing that it was, in
fact, immortal. Just because something is very old does not mean that it will never die. Trees have lived longer than
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
9 500 years, for example (ScienceNews). One species of sponge, Monorhaphis chuni, has been known to have lived
11 000 years (Langley). Bowhead whales can live 200 years (Langley). Despite these impressive life spans, all of
these living creatures eventually die, so any newcomer of great age would initially be presumed to be mortal, and we
would try to explain the cause of the surprisingly long life.
In short, the likelihood that even new evidence would end up overthr owing our knowledge about the mortal nature
of living things is infinitesimally small.
Absolute certainty is much rarer and is only attainable under very particular circumstances. We can claim to know
something with absolute certainty if we (human beings) have power over the reality that the knowledge claim
describes. Naming things, in fact, is one of the most common of the many realities over which humans have
complete power. Famously, in 2006, Pluto lost its status as a planet (Library of Congress). We know, with absolute
certainty, that Pluto is not a planet because ‘planet’ is a term which describes astronomical bodies with certain
features. Human beings, specifically the members of the International Astronomical Union, determined that, based
on recent discoveries, Pluto no longer meets all three of the criteria for planets. The three criteria for what
constitutes a planet have been determined by the human beings in whose authority such matters lie. They could, if
they wished, change the criteria. If they did so, Pluto’s status might change again, because the reality which is
expressed by calling Pluto a dwarf planet, as it is now known, would have changed. We can be absolutely certain
because we create the reality.
Notice that this example shows us that although some knowledge is absolutely certain because it is created by
humans, it can change if humans decide to change it. Pluto used to be a planet, and we were absolutely certain about
that, because we defined ‘planet’. We are now absolutely certain that Pluto is a dwarf planet, because we define both
‘planet’ and ‘dwarf planet’. The change in what is absolutely certain comes about because of a change in the reality
of how we define and order things.
The other situation in which we can assert that our knowledge is absolutely certain is when the knowledge claim is
the result of deductive reasoning. A proof is a formal argument which establishes premises, which are statements of
fact which form the basis of the argument, and a conclusion, which is the logical extension of the premises. In other
words, a formal argument shows that if certain premises are true, then the conclusion must also be true. A very
simple type of formal argument is a syllogism, an argument with two premises and a conclusion. In order to result in
absolute certainty, a syllogism, or any other more complicated proof, must meet two criteria: the premises must be
true, and the logic must be valid. To say that an argument is valid is to say that the logic makes sense so that if the
premises are true, then the argument is sound. Validity, in other words, refers to the logical relationship between the
premises and the conclusion. Soundness refers to an argument in which the logic is valid and the premises are true,
and so, therefore, the conclusion must also be true. This kind of reasoning – the drawing of an unavoidable
conclusion from true premises – is called deductive reasoning. The conclusion drawn is called a deduction.
A fairly well-known syllogism can be used to demonstrate:
All men are mortal.
Here is an example of a syllogism which does not result in an absolutely certain conclusion. See if you can spot the
problem or problems:
If an object is grey, then it is an elephant.
Sarah’s handbag is grey.
Therefore: Sarah’s handbag is an elephant.
The logic, in this case, is valid. That is to say: if the premises were both true, that conclusion would inevitably
follow; however, the first premise is not true. Without true premises and valid logic, the argument is not sound, and
we cannot generate a proof. Once we have a proof, our knowledge is absolutely certain and, in the case of deductive
knowledge, it can never change. It is very important to remember, however, that reason alone cannot lead to
absolute certainty. Our deductions are only as good as the premises that go into them. If the premises are not true,
then we cannot get knowledge out of a formal argument. If we find out at some future point that our premises were
actually false, then our former certainty must be abandoned.
A final point to be made about ‘certainty’ and ‘absolute certainty’ is that the colloquial use of these terms is usually
very different from the technical use. You may have heard people say things like ‘I am absolutely certain that I left
my keys in the kitchen’, or ‘I am absolutely certain that the longest-lived mammal is the Great Blue Whale’, or ‘I am
RELATED IDEAS
We have seen that the concept of certainty encompasses a number of additional concepts. These are:
• the difference between certainty and absolute certainty
• inductive reasoning vs deductive reasoning
• formal arguments, syllogisms and rigorous proofs, including the concepts of premises, conclusions,
valid arguments, true premises and sound arguments
• the problem of induction
• technical vs colloquial uses of the terms ‘certainty’ and ‘absolute certainty’.
IA prompt
8 To what extent is certainty attainable?
ACTIVITY
After you have completed parts A and B of this activity, you can check your answers using the QR code.
Part A
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Read each of the following knowledge claims and determine whether it is certain (that is, beyond
reasonable dispute) or absolutely certain (knowledge that cannot be overturned unless reality itself
actually changes).
1 The names of the days of the week in English are: Sunday, Monday, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday,
Friday and Saturday.
2 The Earth is essentially spherical.
3 If I am standing on Earth and I drop my pen, it will fall to the ground unless stopped by something in
its way.
4 The capital city of Malaysia is Kuala Lumpur.
5 In June 2016, citizens of the United Kingdom voted in favour of ‘Brexit’ – a referendum which
determined that the United Kingdom would withdraw from the European Union.
Part B
Read each of the following syllogisms and determine whether the conclusion (the statement in bold) is
absolutely certain or false. If the conclusion is false, identify the reason.
1 Only cows eat grass. My cat, Max, eats grass; therefore, my cat Max is a cow.
2 Wednesday is the day after Tuesday. Today is Wednesday; therefore, yesterday was Tuesday.
3 Iceland is in the northern hemisphere. Reykjavik is a city in Iceland; therefore, Reykjavik is in the
northern hemisphere.
4 Horses have four legs. My table has four legs; therefore, my table is a horse.
5 The agency responsible for the civilian space programme in the United States, NASA (National
Aeronautics and Space Administration), would like to send a manned spaceship to Mars. NASA has a
project to send a manned spaceship to Mars; therefore, NASA will send a manned spaceship to
Mars.
Taken in its wide ethnographic sense, [culture] is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, morals, law, custom,
and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.
Sir Edward Burnett Tylor
Learner profile
Caring
How does knowledge of culture help us to become caring people?
The concept of ‘culture’ is a familiar one to most of us but can be difficult to truly pin down in a sophisticated way.
The culture of any given society incorporates a great many elements of that society, including the arts, religion,
ceremonies, traditions and mores about a wide range of cultural practices, such as clothing, gender roles and food,
as well as a traditional understanding of the history of that society. Culture includes the ethical and moral values of
the people within it. Sir Edward Burnett Tylor, an English anthropologist of the early twentieth century, described
culture this way: ‘Taken in its wide ethnographic sense, [culture] is that complex whole which includes knowledge,
belief, art, morals, law, custom, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society’
(Tylor). The key idea from Tylor’s definition is that culture consists only of that which is man-made and of
everything that is man-made. All the practices of all the areas of knowledge that you will study during your TOK
course, in other words, are part of culture.
Psychologist Abraham Maslow created a diagram which represents how people, both individually and in groups,
develop from basic, simple lives to more complex ones. At the bottom of the pyramid are the most basic needs –
those which must be fulfilled in order for the person and species to survive. The idea that Maslow wanted to convey
is that we cannot fulfil the needs on any one level until the needs on all the levels below it have been met. They
must, in other words, be fulfilled in order.
The top four levels in Maslow’s hierarchy of needs are those related to the development of complex culture.
Cognitive needs refer to our need to develop knowledge as a society and as individuals, as well as to use all of our
mental capabilities. Aesthetic needs are those related to the search for order and beauty and meaning in form (you
will learn more about this in Chapter 12 about the arts). Self-actualization needs relate to individuals’ desires to
maximize all their personal capacities, to feel fulfilled (McLeod). Transcendence needs are those which deal with a
person being ‘motivated by values which transcend beyond the personal self (eg, mystical experiences and certain
experiences with nature, aesthetic experiences, sexual experiences, service to others, the pursuit of science, religious
faith, etc)’ (McLeod).
RELATED IDEAS
We have seen that the concept of culture encompasses a number of additional concepts. These are:
• beliefs about what is ethical and moral and the difference between ethics and morals
• the development of biological human nature vs the development of human-created social conventions
• the relationship between the stages of Maslow’s hierarchy and the development of culture
• the relationship between culture and beliefs
• the reciprocal relationship between knowledge and culture.
IA prompt
21 What is the relationship between knowledge and culture?
IA prompt
29 Who owns knowledge?
Evidence is any fact or claim that someone offers in support of another claim. Sometimes people will offer facts in
support of a claim and sometimes they will offer opinions, so we need to know the difference between those two
things.
A fact is a feature of reality. Facts exist whether we know about them or not, but a large part of what we do when we
try to make or discover or otherwise generate knowledge is to determine what the facts are. Over the course of this
book, we will delineate the kinds of facts that make up the reality of all the different areas of knowledge and
knowledge-making that TOK explores. For now, here are a few examples: the natural sciences deal with facts about
the physical nature of the universe, so we can say that it is a fact that the Earth travels a path around the Sun. This
fact was famously established by the sixteenth-century scientist Nicolaus Copernicus. It was not accepted readily,
especially by the leadership of the Catholic Church, but eventually it had to be accepted because it is in fact true.
You may not know that that same claim was made 1 800 years before Copernicus by a Greek astronomer,
Aristarchus of Stamos. His claim also offended religious leaders, who accused him of ‘impiety’ (Evans). Even
though many people were offended when first hearing about these facts, the facts about the relationship between the
Sun and the Earth are true. They accurately describe reality.
Another type of fact is one which arises from a reality that is under the control of humans. We have looked at some
of these facts already: that your name is what it is is a fact, because your parents are the people who had the legal
right to name you, and they did. If today is Tuesday, then it is a fact that today is Tuesday, because humans invented
the calendar and the organization of days into weeks, and the originators of English gave Tuesday its name. If you
are legally required to go to school until age 18, or to drive at or below a given speed limit, or if you are forbidden to
get married until a certain age, these are facts that were established by humans living together in society and making
agreements about what would constitute behaviour that allows the society to flourish.
Not every statement of ‘fact’ is actually a fact. People will sometimes claim as fact things which are either a matter
of opinion or belief, or which are simply untrue.
You might have heard some people defend a claim that they have made by declaring: ‘I am entitled to my own
opinion!’ or ‘I have a right to my own opinion!’ That claim is true, but only under very specific conditions. To say
that you are ‘entitled’ to something, or that you ‘have a right’ to something is a very strong statement. To be entitled
to something, or to have a right to something, means that it is owed to you, either by birth right, because you have
earned it, or because it is yours by law. We do, indeed, have many rights. We have legal rights which are granted to
us by our governments and by laws which govern our societies. Many people would agree that we are born with
certain rights. The Declaration of Independence, the document which declared Britain’s 13 colonies in North
America to be free and independent of the rule of King George III, contains the claim that we have certain
inalienable rights, including ‘life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness’ (‘Declaration of Independence: A
Notice, finally, that in those cases in which your opinion is, in fact, the appropriate determining factor of what
reality is, then your opinion becomes a fact, and you are entitled to it. These are very limited kinds of facts,
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
however, and they do not extend to the world beyond your personal control!
Both facts and opinions might be offered as evidence for knowledge claims. If you claim that your mother will let
you go to the cinema with your friends on the weekend, you might support that claim with either facts (she already
told you that you could go) or with your opinion (she has let you go before, and so you think that she will let you go
this time, too).
A third kind of thing which might be offered as evidence for a claim is physical evidence. In the United States, the
fourth of July is a national holiday, which most people think celebrates the signing of the Declaration of
Independence. However, the Declaration of Independence was not signed on 4 July, but rather on 2 August (Sneff).
The evidence for that fact consists of several historical documents – primary sources from July and August 1776
which are now housed in the US government archives. Harvard doctoral student Emily Sneff details the documents
used to determine the actual date on which the official copy of the Declaration of Independence was signed, in a
fascinating blog post for the Declaration Resources Project. You can use the QR code in the margin on the right to
read it.
One of these supporting documents is Thomas Jefferson’s ‘Notes of Proceedings in the Continental Congress, 7 June
– 1 August 1776’. Another is the parchment declaration itself, which was ‘fairly engrossed’, that is, copied out in a
large clear handwriting, by a man named Timothy Matlack. That claim, in turn, has been established by handwriting
experts comparing the handwriting on the Declaration to documents which are known to have been written by
Matlack (Sneff). Another physical artefact which serves as relevant evidence in this investigation is a letter from
delegate Benjamin Rush from Pennsylvania to John Adams describing the solemnity of the ceremony of the signing
on 2 August (Sneff). Physical artefacts very commonly provide evidence of historical events.
Any knowledge claim requires some sort of evidence. Evidence, however, is not the same thing as proof. Consider
the examples above: in the case of your claim that your mother will let you go to the cinema, it will be correct so
long as she has indeed told you that you may go. If you are offering your opinion, based only on past experiences,
you might easily be shown to be wrong when the time comes. Perhaps your mother has other plans for you for
Friday night that you don’t know about. Perhaps your mother has taken a disliking to those friends or feels that the
movie you want to see is inappropriate. Perhaps your mother needs you to babysit your younger siblings because she
is going to be out that evening herself. Many facts of which you are unaware could easily contradict your belief that
you will be able to go to the cinema this weekend. Finally, although you would never lie to your friends about your
beliefs, some people do lie when they make claims about what is true.
The trip to the cinema example reveals one kind of problem: the problem of establishing the accuracy of claims
which are made on an individual’s word alone. The example of the signing of the Declaration of Independence
offers another reason that evidence alone does not constitute proof, because the facts are incomplete, and they
conflict with each other. Jefferson said that the document was signed on 4 July during the meeting of the Continental
Congress (Jefferson); however, if that document existed, it has disappeared. We do know that after 4 July, the
‘engrossed’ copy was made and signed on 2 August, according to the Journals of the Continental Congress (Sneff).
Despite many years’ study and the examination of a great many more primary source documents which are not
mentioned here, a few historians still do not accept the claim that the Declaration of Independence was signed on 2
August 1776. This digression from the norm reveals another aspect of the relationship between evidence and proof:
the evidence has to be convincing to the person to whom it is offered, or no agreement can be reached. In the study
of history, we seldom achieve universal agreement, for reasons that you will explore in much greater depth in the
chapter on history as an area of knowledge.
In order, therefore, to prove a knowledge claim, to establish that it is true, one must certainly have evidence, but the
simple offering of evidence alone is insufficient to demonstrate the validity of any claim. For evidence to become
convincing, several other elements must be present. Evidence must first be examined, tested and verified. There
must be sufficient evidence to be convincing. Similar to the way that premises are used in syllogisms or rigorous
proofs, evidence offered in less formally structured arguments must be believable and the explanation, as we shall
see in our exploration of the concepts of explanation and justification, must be logical enough to be convincing.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Each kind of knowledge-generating undertaking has its own procedures for accomplishing all of these things, as you
will see in the following chapters.
A final concept related to evidence is the concept of belief. To say that ‘I believe’ something means that you accept
it as true (Corvino). You can have beliefs which apply to facts or to opinions. You can say that you believe your
mother will let you go to the cinema either because she has told you that you can or because she has allowed you to
go on past occasions and you have no reason to expect this week to be any different. Historians can say that they
believe that the evidence supporting the claim that the Declaration of Independence was signed on 2 August is
sufficient to demonstrate the truth of that claim, or they can say that they do not believe it. ‘Belief’, then, applies to
individuals and their relationship to knowledge claims. Someone can believe something which is not true (such as
the ‘flat-earther’ who believes that the Earth is flat) and someone else might refuse to believe something which is
true (such as the anti-vaxxer who refuses to believe that it is in her child’s best interest to be vaccinated).
Learner profile
Open-minded
How does being open-minded help us to refine and justify our beliefs?
The word ‘belief’ is nearly synonymous with the word ‘opinion’ in that both describe the relationship of an
individual mind to reality. Just as beliefs can be either correct or incorrect, so can opinions. We did, however, note
earlier in this section that there are times when opinion is the prevailing force for determining reality. In those cases
(‘chocolate swirl is the best ice cream’ or ‘Manchester United is my favourite soccer team’ or ‘there is nowhere
better to live in India than Delhi’), we would be more likely to use the word ‘opinion’ than the word ‘belief,’ but you
can see how similar they are. We do, however, use the word ‘belief’ in some cases in which we would not use the
word ‘opinion’. Some examples are ‘I believe you’, or ‘I believe in God’, or ‘I believe in the importance of giving
back to your community’. The idea of belief in these cases tends to convey an extra depth of emotional commitment
to an idea that ‘opinion’ does not imply.
TOK trap
One final important point to make about beliefs is that all beliefs are based in evidence and argument,
although some beliefs ultimately turn out to be based in good evidence and valid arguments, while other
beliefs deny facts or fail to accept logical connections between them.
A common mistake that students make when writing their TOK essays is to assert that people who
believe in God, or a god, or some gods have no evidence for their beliefs. Such a claim is not true; no
one has beliefs without evidence. The evidence for the existence of a deity or deities consists of holy
texts and historical artefacts which are associated with the history of that religion. Believers also have
evidence in the form of testimony from other believers – family members and religious leaders, for
example. Many believers experience moments of personal revelation in which they feel themselves to be
connected to a deity in an emotional sense. All of these experiences are evidence. You will explore in
more detail the particular kind of belief that constitutes religious belief, as well as the role of faith as a
way of knowing in developing that belief, in Chapter 6 later in this book.
RELATED IDEAS
Concepts related to evidence are:
• sufficiency of evidence
• belief
• facts
• proof
• opinions
IA prompt
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
25 How can we distinguish between knowledge, belief and opinion?
An explanation in TOK terms is the same kind of explanation that you are used to in everyday life. An explanation
is a description of a thing, system or phenomenon. However, an explanation goes beyond simply describing, because
it accounts for why the thing is the way it is, or what it does, or what it is good for. ‘Explanation’ is included as an
important concept in TOK because so much of our knowledge functions to explain something.
Explanations are used by people who have knowledge (or facts, opinions or beliefs) in order to make those ideas
clear to someone else. Consider, for instance, an explanation from mathematics, the Pythagorean Theorem: a2 + b2 =
c2. The theorem is an explanation of the relationship between the lengths of the sides of a right triangle. An
explanation from the arts can be found in the article ‘In Dutch Still Lifes, Dark Secrets Hide Behind Exotic
Delicacies’, which provides an explanation of the meaning of Clara Peeters’ painting Still Life with Cheeses,
Artichoke, and Cherries (c. 1625). Consider how author Julia Fiore offers much more than a description of the
painting:
Indeed, the painting has a nationalistic flavor. The butter and huge cheese wheels that dominate the
As with evidence and opinions and beliefs, explanations cannot in and of themselves make something true. There
are good explanations and bad explanations. An explanation in and of itself cannot ensure that the listener will
understand or accept the knowledge. Sometimes individuals refuse to accept even good explanations. Famously,
Copernicus’ explanation of the heliocentric universe (the idea that the Sun is assumed to lie at or near a central point
of the solar system while the Earth and other bodies revolve around it) was not accepted by the Roman Catholic
Church. However, you might not know that the church did initially accept the theory, rejecting it only in 1616, 73
years after Copernicus’ book De Revolutionibus Orbium Coelestium was published, when a big push of Protestant
claims that the theory was heresy drove the Catholic Church to fall in line (Singham). Ironically, the Protestant
Church was then the first to accept the theory after new findings by such scientists as Galileo and Isaac Newton
supported it. The Catholic Church did not lift the ban on Copernicus’ book until 1835 (Solis). In this example, then,
a good explanation was initially accepted by the Catholic Church, then rejected by both the Protestant and Catholic
Churches, then accepted by the Protestant institutions, but not finally officially accepted by the Catholic leadership
until nearly 300 years after the original explanation was offered!
RELATED IDEAS
Concepts related to explanation are:
• good explanations
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
• belief
• bad explanations
• opinions.
• theory
‘Interpretation’ means to examine the facts in a particular case and then to figure out what they mean. Usually,
interpretation is called for when we have a set of facts and we want to figure out what conclusions we can draw from
the whole set together. The simple existence of a rock is a fact that needs no interpretation. However, if we examine
the rock microscopically and discover that it has in it some elements which are not normally found on Earth, we
must then make an interpretation of what the presence of those elements suggests. In 1971, Apollo 14 brought a
sample of Moon rocks back to Earth (see image on page 17). In early 2019, scientists at the Center for Lunar
Science and Exploration, a department in NASA (the United States’ space exploration agency) published a paper
arguing that one of those rocks originated on Earth, was jettisoned off the Earth by something like the impact of a
meteor and, in its turn, landed on the Moon as space debris 4 billion years ago (Anderson). This conclusion was
based on the facts shown in Table 1.1.
We might be able to find some interpretations convincing even if there are some ambiguities or unanswered
questions because they account for what is known in a logical way. However, the more facts an interpretation can
account for, the more thoroughly convincing it is likely to be. The connection between the facts and the
interpretations also must be logical and they have to go together in a system that makes sense. The scientists’
explanation about the Earth rock on the Moon does both of these things. You should recognize these requirements
As you study the areas of knowledge and the knowledge-related themes throughout your TOK course, one of the
things you will be learning is how interpretation is done in each of those realms. The processes differ because the
conditions for knowledge-making and the availability and nature of facts differ. In the astronomy example we saw
above, the facts have to do with physical properties of the rock itself, all of which are observable today, regardless of
the fact that the rock itself is 4 billion years old and that it was brought back to Earth nearly 50 years ago. Historians,
on the other hand, though they do have access to some physical objects, do not have access to nearly the quantity of
physical evidence that natural scientists can study, nor are the physical objects themselves the only facts that
historians would like to have. They would like to know, for example, what was said between Copernicus and church
leaders at the time of the publication of his book about the heliocentric universe. They would like to know what was
said at the meeting during which it was decided to build the Great Wall of China. As it is, historians must content
themselves with whatever records are left, and we are always aware that what has survived is very likely to be only a
small fraction of what originally existed.
In the arts, the facts which are used for interpretation consist primarily of the features of the individual artwork. In
the earlier example of the Dutch still life, you can see the picture for yourself, so you can see that Julia Fiore’s
interpretation of the painting does take into account the facts of the painting: the cheeses, the biscuit, the marks of
the knife in the butter and the remnant of the eaten cherry. But that interpretation also required knowledge of a great
many other facts about the beliefs of what Fiore called ‘prevailing Calvinist sentiments’. Her interpretation was
based on the nature of the work of art, but also on a consideration of its having been created in a particular place at a
particular time. Because the culture of that time and place influenced the making of the painting, the interpreter of
the painting must know something about that culture in order to be able to interpret effectively.
Part of what you will be doing in TOK is to consider the ways in which interpretations are constructed, evaluating
the accuracy and relevance of the proposed facts and judging the validity of the argument presented. But part of
what you will be doing is developing and presenting interpretations of your own, which you will also have to do in
your other IB courses.
Assessment advice
In creating your TOK exhibition, you will have to be able to interpret the significance of objects in terms
of what they reveal about how knowledge functions in the real world. Imagine that you were creating an
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
exhibition about the degree to which certainty is possible. You will have to choose objects which will
illustrate an answer or several different answers to that question. In order to choose objects that reveal
insight into this aspect of knowledge in the real world, you must interpret a variety of objects and choose
the best ones. So perhaps you would consider how a calculator functions in mathematics and what it
suggests about certainty. A calculator is used to perform calculations that humans cannot perform – or at
least cannot perform very rapidly. Say, for example, you wished to know the answer to the following
expression:
You can input the equation into the calculator and get the answer: 536.04. That answer is absolutely
certain. The calculator knows the order of operations, so it first calculates the (92 × 87) which is in
parentheses. It then divides that number, which is 8004, by 100 which gives a response of 80.04, to
which it adds 456, for a total of 536.04.
In this instance, the calculator is an example of an object which stands for the ability to achieve absolute
certainty. This statement is our interpretation of the significance of the calculator as an object which
reveals something about the initial question of the degree to which certainty is possible. For your
exhibition, you would then justify your choice of the calculator by explaining your interpretation of its
significance.
For your TOK essay, your interpretive job is somewhat different. For that assessment, you will choose
from a list of prescribed titles and then you will have to examine real-world situations to see what kind of
answers they suggest to the question. Imagine, for example, that you were writing an essay in response
to this potential prescribed title: ‘How does an individual knower gain from and contribute to the
knowledge of a community? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.’
The essential question here is: ‘In what way can shared knowledge shape personal knowledge?’
Suppose that you have just recently read about Stanford Bioengineer Manu Prakash who, in 2016, won
a MacArthur Genius grant for the invention of a $1 microscope made out of paper which the user folds,
like origami. Prakash’s microscope has been distributed to tens of thousands of children around the
world, and they have been able to contribute their scientific findings to a website for uses of the
Foldoscope. The express purpose of this invention was to engage people in scientific practice and to
inspire wonder about the natural world. Prakesh cites one 6-year-old girl who was inspired by the movie
Frozen to research crystals. ‘She researched over months and months all kinds of crystals she could
find, all the way to medicine cabinets, to ice cream, to maple taffy. It’s incredible to just watch her go and
you watch her progression of how she came to that experiment’ (Resnick).
Once you know the facts of the story, your job is to interpret its significance in terms of providing an
answer to the question in the prescribed title. For this real-world example, you might argue that shared
knowledge of how microscopes work, along with shared knowledge about origami, combined in Prakash
and his graduate students to produce the foldable microscope. The foldable microscope in turn reaches
outside of the professional scientific community to engage new participants in the knowledge-making
endeavour. We see a kind of cycle of individual and community knowledge influencing each other.
Knowledge of both microscopes and origami is widely known by many people, but perhaps there are not
very many people who have extensive knowledge of both, and certainly no one else had ever thought of
combining them before. So, Prakash took his personal knowledge from two very different fields to create
something totally new which was, initially anyway, a matter of his individual knowledge. He then shared
that new knowledge widely in order to inspire young people to develop their own individual knowledge of
scientific observation. The young people in turn can then share their individual knowledge through the
website, so that it can become community knowledge. So, our interpretation of this real-life situation is
that it shows in two different ways that community knowledge forms the essential basis for the
development of new individual knowledge, as well as two different ways in which individual knowledge
can become community knowledge. In your essay, you would explain your interpretation and justify its
effectiveness.
As you create your TOK assessments, you need to realize that the act of creating an interpretation is the
act of examining the facts and developing an explanation for why it is that they all coexist. It is an act of
finding the meaning in something. The act of presenting an interpretation to someone else is the act of
justifying your interpretation. ‘Justification’ is, in fact, our next course concept.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
RELATED IDEAS
Concepts related to interpretation are:
• argument
• facts
• logic
• justification.
A justification is a type of explanation; however, a justification includes an attempt to persuade the listener that the
actions taken were correct or at least understandable. Explanations don’t include any overt attempt to convince the
listener to believe what is being said, while justifications do. As we saw with explanations, there are, of course, good
justifications and bad justifications. A bad justification is one in which, rather than providing a rational and
compelling explanation, the person offering it is simply making excuses for herself or for someone else. Another
word for the kind of self-serving and inappropriate attempt at justification is rationalization. Rationalizations, despite
the fact that they sound like they must be logical, because the word contains the idea of reason, are weak
explanations which attempt to excuse behaviour that the person offering the rationalization knows was wrong. The
professor who falsifies data in a study and then tries to justify it by saying that there was a lot of pressure from the
pharmaceutical company paying for the research is offering a rationalization.
An effective justification, on the other hand, provides good reasons that explain a behaviour or decision without
necessarily exonerating the person who made the decision or took the action. For example, Orlando Patterson,
writing for the New York Times in 1999, discussed Hillary Clinton’s explanation for her husband’s having
committed adultery and then lying about it. She attributed his behaviour, which she called a sin of weakness, to his
dysfunctional family background. Patterson addresses the fact that Hillary Clinton drew a lot of criticism from
people who thought that she was trying to ‘justify’ her husband’s infidelity by saying it wasn’t really his fault.
Patterson disagreed, saying that he did not take what Mrs Clinton said to suggest in any way that she was absolving
her husband from responsibility for his actions.
Patterson’s suggestion is that Hillary Clinton was explaining her husband’s bad behaviour, but she was not justifying
it. In this sense of ‘justification’, the word implies making excuses for someone – in this case, President Clinton – so
that that person is not responsible for his bad deeds. Hillary Clinton was not doing that; she was simply explaining
the roots of her husband’s inability to choose well. She said elsewhere, quite bluntly, that President Clinton was a
grown man and therefore responsible for his own behaviour (Patterson).
Rationalization is a common understanding of the idea of justification in everyday speech, but we will use the term
more narrowly in TOK.
Assessment advice
In the context of Theory of Knowledge and, more generally, in the broader context of students in
education, justifications are not self-serving. Throughout the IB Diploma Programme, you will be asked
to justify the claims that you make, particularly on your IB assessments.
In TOK, you will complete an exhibition, for which you will choose several objects in the real world, and
you will have to justify your choices by explaining why those particular objects effectively represent an
idea about how knowledge works in the real world. For your TOK essay, you will have to choose some
real-life situations and make claims about what those situations reveal about the way knowledge works
with regard to a specific idea, which will be expressed in the prescribed title you choose to write about.
Here you will have to justify your interpretation of what that real-life example reveals with regard to that
title.
In both cases, what will make your work justifications rather than explanations is the fact that you must
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
convince your examiner that your thinking and your ideas are effective. Your justifications will be
persuasive if they are accurate, rational, balanced and objective. Those qualities are all reflected in this
list of course concepts. Accuracy is an important component of the concept of truth (page 33). We saw
that rationality, which pertains to the effective use of reason, is an important element of the concept of
certainty (page 3). The idea of balance is an important component of perspective (page 25) and
objectivity is itself one of the main course concepts (page 2).
The reason that you are so often called to produce justifications, rather than explanations, over the course of your
educational career is that your work is so often being judged, either by teachers or by examiners. This kind of
justification does, however, also apply in the world outside of academia. Sometimes we are called upon to justify
our choices because they seem on the outside to have been misguided, but when explained, can be justified as
having resulted in a proper course of action. This is particularly true with regard to ethical knowledge-making. If
you must make a hard decision about whether the right thing to do is to turn your best friend in for cheating on one
of their IB assessments, you have to choose between competing ethical values: loyalty and support and honesty and
integrity. If you choose to turn in your friend, you will probably have to justify to them why you did it. Perhaps you
have several reasons: for instance, that the rules have to apply equally to everyone rather than privileging some; that
if your friend gets away with turning in work that wasn’t theirs, they not only cheated, but lost the opportunity to
learn and to show what they could actually do; that one instance of cheating tends to result in repeated instances, so
that ultimately, your friend’s education, as well as their ability to believe in their own talents, could be seriously
compromised. These are good reasons for a decision to turn your friend in, and they would comprise a proper
justification for your decision.
On the other hand, if you decide not to turn your friend in because you wish to be loyal to them no matter what, you
will have to justify that decision. Interestingly, you may find it harder to convince anyone but your friend. You
might argue that loyalty is more important than honesty, but if we delve into that claim, we have to start asking
ourselves whether covering up lies really constitutes loyalty, because doing so is not ultimately in the best interest of
the person we’re covering up for. In helping your friend cover up their misdeed, you become complicit in that
misdeed, and it is always harder to successfully justify a bad action. This is often the case with ethical dilemmas: we
are faced with a difficult decision, and sometimes the difficulty arises from the fact that both options result in
equally good and bad outcomes. Pretty frequently the difficulty comes from the fact that doing the right thing will
cost us something that we value. If, in those cases, we decide not to pay the price, we are likely to find that our
justification is of the everyday sort in which we are really only rationalizing a decision we know was not the right
one.
In Theory of Knowledge, when we examine the justifications people in the real world give for their courses of
action, we will evaluate those justifications using the same standards that your teachers and examiners use to
evaluate your justifications to them. This is because we want to be sure that the decisions that people make are
sound, rational and disinterested, rather than biased or self-serving. We need to determine whether the knowledge
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
upon which people’s actions were based, or upon which conclusions were drawn, is sound, and that their
explanations for why they acted as they did are, therefore, true justifications rather than rationalizations.
One final note about justification: in our discussion of the concept of evidence, we examined the role of opinion in
knowledge development. In situations in which your opinion is the determining factor, such as the identification of
your favourite book or film, no justification is required. The justification is that you like it. You might give your
reasons for why you like rap music better than classical music or vice versa, but you do not need to persuade anyone
that your choice is ‘right’. Where opinion matters, opinion is the deciding factor.
RELATED IDEAS
Concepts related to justification are:
• explanation
• disinterestedness
• rationalization
• exoneration.
IA prompt
19 What counts as a good justification for a claim?
As we saw in the introduction to this book, this course takes as an ethical obligation the need to produce accurate
knowledge. We saw that we must strive to create knowledge which is accurate because the costs of disseminating
‘knowledge’ or ‘facts’ which are not true are so very high. Regardless of whether the knowledge being produced is
professional knowledge, such as that generated in the formal areas of knowledge, or whether it is personal
knowledge or the kinds of knowledge that we will examine in the optional themes sections of the course, for
knowledge to be functional it must be as accurate as we can possibly make it.
Objectivity, the ability to observe, to interpret, to analyse and to report such that we have not shaped our processes
or our findings by our personal wishes, is an important requirement necessary to the generation of accurate
knowledge. ‘Disinterestedness,’ which we discussed in the section on justification, is another word for objectivity.
The opposite of objectivity is subjectivity. The word ‘subjectivity’ means to take an intellectual stance in which
information is filtered through our expectations and so is coloured by those expectations.
One barrier to accuracy with which you may be familiar is cognitive bias. Cognitive bias is a generic term for a
variety of mechanisms that take place unconsciously in a knower’s brain and which keep that person from seeing the
world in a clear-minded, objective way. If a knower wants badly for something to be true, they might fall victim to
several kinds of problems. One very familiar type of cognitive bias is confirmation bias. ‘Confirmation bias’ is the
technical term for a person ignoring evidence which works against a desired outcome. The learner or researcher, in
other words, just looks for evidence which confirms their preconceptions. Psychologists and sociologists have
identified many other types of cognitive bias. The poster on page 23 shows 24 of these kinds of bias. To see the full-
size poster, use the QR code in the margin.
Notice that all of these kinds of bias are subconscious. The influence of these biases, then, on the production of
knowledge is quite different from the kind of deliberate obfuscation of facts, manufacturing of evidence or outright
lying that can result in ‘knowledge claims’ being made which are just not true. Researchers or learners who
deliberately engage in activities which they know will result in false claims are not demonstrating cognitive bias,
they are demonstrating unethical practice.
Other forces besides cognitive biases can keep us from being completely objective. We saw how culture, for
example, can shape what we know. The culture in which we were raised and the culture in which we live shapes our
thinking in significant ways. It affects what we believe is right and wrong and it affects what we believe is possible.
These values shape the way we approach everything we encounter. The effect of culture on knowledge is perhaps
most obviously seen in the area of ethical knowledge-making, but it is also a very powerful force in the making of
knowledge about religion or politics.
Jonathan Haidt, Professor of Ethical Leadership at New York University’s Stern School of Business, is well known
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
for having identified foundational beliefs that are powerful predictors of people’s political affiliations. We will
explore these more in Chapter 7 (Knowledge and Politics), but as an example, he suggests that there is a
fundamental difference in worldview between self-identified liberals and self-identified conservatives. The liberals
care more about fairness and not causing harm than they do about loyalty to a group of like-minded people or
compliance with authority, while conservatives think the opposite values are most important.
You can see how these attitudes might shape what the different groups of people understand and know: someone
who cares about not causing harm will be more likely to believe that gun control laws need to be strict, while
someone who cares about in-group loyalty might believe that it’s much more important to be loyal to those people
who own guns for recreational purposes or for protection of their homes and families than it is to worry about
whether some people might be injured or killed by irresponsible gun use.
IA prompt
3 What features of knowledge have an impact on its reliability?
The respective knowledge of the opposing groups is shaped by the culture and by the values of the culture in which
the individuals formed their worldviews. Haidt notes that it’s not that either liberals or conservatives don’t share
values – liberal people do care about loyalty and authority and conservative people do care about fairness and harm
– it’s that they hold those values in different relationship in terms of their relative importance. You can use the QR
code on the right to watch Haidt’s TED talk on the subject. You will read more about Haidt’s work and what it
reveals about political knowledge in Chapter 7.
You can see that in the cases of knowledge which is founded on our moral values and ethical principles, the question
of whether we are capable of objectivity is much trickier than when the knowledge is founded in observations of
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
facts in the world (though you will see in later chapters that sometimes identifying objective facts about the world is
also tricky and potentially influenced by subjectivity). Who could say whether it is more ‘objective’ to value one
principle, such as loyalty or adherence to authority, over others, such as fairness and the wish to do no harm? Pure
objectivity, therefore, is extremely difficult to attain, so what we look for is the willingness to be open-minded to
judge facts carefully and rationally and the ability to rethink conclusions when new evidence is discovered.
A final note about objectivity: some kinds of knowledge do not need to be objective. Knowledge which is conveyed
through the arts is highly subjective, and that is surely much of the point. Art is a medium through which we gain
insight into the artist’s view of the world. The artist’s subjectivity is not only not unethical, it is desirable. The point
of a work of art, from the artist’s perspective, is to reflect something about the artist’s view of the world. In
interpreting the artwork, however, we have to try to be much more objective than the artist had to be, as we are
trying to discover something outside of ourselves.
Subjectivity in viewing artwork, however, does not carry the same kind of catastrophic consequences that
subjectivity in choosing not to accept important scientific knowledge carries. If you don’t know, for instance, that
crumbling bread was a symbol of decay and that an eaten cherry was a sign of the impermanence of life in the Clara
Peeters’ still life on page 14, and you interpreted it through your subjective belief that a meal of bread and cheese
symbolizes poverty, you would have missed some ideas that you might have been able to get had you been more
objective and searched for ideas outside of yourself. However, you would not cause anyone harm in the way that
failure to be objective about vaccines can cause harm. And as we have seen several times now, some kinds of
knowledge are predicated on your own personal subjectivity. Those are the kinds of knowledge in which your
personal opinion is the deciding factor for what is true.
RELATED IDEAS
Concepts related to objectivity are:
• disinterestedness
• cognitive bias
• confirmation bias
• preconceptions
• open-mindedness.
ACTIVITY
After you have completed this activity you can check your answers by using the first QR code.
As you should now be aware, there is a strong relationship between many of the concepts that we have
examined so far. The concepts are all related to how we determine whether or not a particular claim is
true, though each one describes a slightly different aspect of the process of demonstrating the truth of a
particular knowledge claim.
Examine the graph below, which is based on data from NASA (United States’ National Aeronautics and
Space Administration). It is one of many different representations of data which have been studied to
determine the cause of global climate change. If you wish to, use the second QR code on the right to
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
read more about the graph on the NASA Global Climate Change website.
Answer the questions below the graph.
‘Perspective’ is the word that we use to describe the particular viewpoint from which an individual takes in
information and decides what is important or what something means. We saw, in our consideration of objectivity,
that sometimes one’s personal perspective can be problematic for the production of accurate knowledge. It can
certainly be problematic in terms of our ability to come to an agreement with others who see the world from
perspectives which are fundamentally different to our own. Because of this difficulty, the IB mission statement
contains a direct acknowledgment in the belief of the value of being able to accept different perspectives. The
mission statement expresses the idea that students who complete IB programmes become people who ‘understand
that other people, with their differences, can also be right’. An important part of what we are trying to do in TOK is
to understand how we develop our own perspectives – the habits of mind which shape what we can and do know.
Once we understand our own, we are much better positioned to recognize that other people have formed their
perspectives in logical, reasonable ways as well, and to be able to move toward understanding others.
Perspective is a particularly thorny concept when it comes to the making of religious or ethical knowledge. Wars
have been fought for centuries over the differences in perspectives about which religion has the ‘right’
understanding of mankind’s place in the Universe. Religious knowledge tends to be presented as a matter of
absolutes – there is one God or there is not; Jesus Christ came to Earth as the messiah or he did not; people who
accept Jesus Christ as their saviour will go to heaven when they die and those who do not will go to hell; or there is
no heaven or hell. These different positions are, for many people dichotomous. That is, they do not lend themselves
to compromise. If I believe that there is no god and no such thing as heaven or hell, I am not going to find it easy to
believe that other people, with their viewpoint that I am going to go to hell for my atheism, can also be right.
Many of the ethical dilemmas that we face individually or as communities or countries arise from situations, perhaps
similar to the one above, in which we hold a perspective which is not only fundamentally irreconcilable with the
perspective of someone else, but in which we also believe that our perspective is morally right. As a result of this,
we are brought to the point of having to decide whether to interfere with someone else’s way of doing things.
Clearly this kind of situation ought to be approached very cautiously. We have seen the negative consequences –
sometimes truly horrific consequences – of the decisions of one people to interfere with the culture and lives of
another people throughout history. Probably you know some of the many stories of invasion and conquest that
resulted in the complete, or nearly complete, destruction of the way of life of the Indigenous people of the Americas,
Africa or Alaska and the far north. You probably know about the millions of people who died in the Holocaust, the
Russian pogroms and the genocides in Cambodia, Bosnia, Darfur and Rwanda. All of these, and many others, are
extreme examples of people who had one perspective about how life ought to be lived, and particularly about which
god ought to be worshipped, and who took it as their responsibility to impose that perspective on others. All of these
examples suggest that the IB mission statement is correct, and those millions of people ought to have been left alone
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
to live their lives as they saw fit.
The mission statement says, however, that ‘others with their differences can also be right’; it does not say ‘are also
right’. The mission statement, does, therefore, allow for the kind of situation in which we have to make the moral
judgments required of us to stand up for what is right and to step in when wrongs are being done. The difficulty,
then, is knowing when that time has come. Most people would agree that when we see someone – individually or in
a group – being bullied mercilessly by someone else, we should not respect the perspective of the bullies, but we
should rather step in and help the person or people who are being victimized. Many countries have been founded on
the principle of religious freedom which means (or ought to mean) that they have codified a value of respecting the
religious practices of others, whether those practices are like ours or not. In practice, that value has proven time and
again to be an extremely difficult one to live up to. Many people feel so strongly that they have the one and only
correct religion that they feel compelled to try to force it onto others. Even in situations in which people desire to
respect religious practices that are different from their own, some people may feel compelled to interfere because of
a perception that some of the practices are inhumane or restrict the personal freedoms of others, often women. The
difficulty, then, becomes how to know when such interference is a matter of moral justice and when it is a matter of
unwarranted and inexcusable meddling. Just because these questions are difficult to resolve, however, does not
mean that we should not try.
Perspective is not always a problem for the production of knowledge, however; sometimes it is a vitally important
contributing factor. That charge from the International Baccalaureate Organization is easier and more relevant in
some areas of knowledge and in some knowledge-making situations than in others. In the generation of historical
knowledge, multiple perspectives are extremely important to our ability to create a full understanding of past events.
We can understand this claim better by examining a case in which only one perspective of a historical period was
provided.
You may have heard the claim that ‘history is written by the victors’, which is so commonly offered as an
explanation for how historical knowledge gets made that it has become a cliché. It is true, too, that our knowledge of
past events has led to the mischaracterization of many historical events because only one perspective was offered. In
the Soviet Union, Stalin went so far as to produce a textbook, the Short Course on the History of the USSR, for
school children which Stalin himself edited by hand. Professor David Brandenberger of the University of Richmond
in Virginia in the US has written a book about that textbook. Brandenberger identifies a number of ways in which
Stalin altered the history of the Soviet Union so that those school children, from 1959 to 1986, grew up learning a
certain version of Soviet history which later turned out not to be true. Among numerous other observations,
Brandenberger says this about Stalin’s input to the text:
First, Stalin consistently strengthened etatist aspects of this historical narrative, enhancing aspects of
Russian history connected to the consolidation of central political authority. This put the communist leader
in the awkward position of defending the historical legacies of not only the tsars and their servitors, but the
Russian Orthodox Church as well. (Brandenberger)
Since the whole point of the Russian Revolution in 1919 was to overthrow the tsars, who were believed to be
running the country in ways that were detrimental to the working class, a textbook which presents the Soviet Union
as somehow being derived from the legacy of those same tsars and which, therefore, defends the royal family, is
surprisingly misleading. Stalin’s remaking of the past of the Soviet movement is an extreme example of what can
happen when only one perspective – that of the people in power – is recorded and disseminated. Many other
examples of strongly biased history were reported through less deliberately obfuscatory means.
Whether it is done deliberately, or indirectly due to lack of care, the presentation of history through only one
perspective leaves us with a very narrow kind of knowledge. In the present day, historical practices have changed a
good deal, and now multiple perspectives on historical events are commonly sought out so that they can be included
on the historical record. Once we can learn about a particular event from multiple perspectives, we can start to
understand how different people experience the world differently.
Historian Jon Wiener, writing for Slate Magazine, described a potential high school study unit on ‘Reconstruction
following the American Civil War’, and advocated having students consider the Reconstruction from three different
perspectives: the northerners who wanted to bring the southern black population into the national economy, the
white plantation owners of the south who wanted to keep as much of their pre-war lifestyle as they could, despite
having lost their slaves, and the former slaves, for whom freedom meant, among other things, the right to work for
themselves. Wiener suggests that students who study the Reconstruction from different perspectives learn to see that
One reason that it has been historically true that only winners write history is that winners of any conflict were the
ones who took control of the systems for recording and disseminating information. Poor people and people who
were not in positions of influence had no means of getting their version of events out to the world. Modern
technology has added considerably to the ability of the less wealthy, less well-armed, less powerful people to get
their side of a story out to the rest of the world. During the Arab Spring uprising in Egypt in 2011, for example,
video and audio recordings as well as written information was sent out of Egypt to the western world via social
media. We now have on record those primary sources rather than just having the story as told by the Egyptian
government.
In Chapter 3 (Knowledge and Technology), we will explore the many problems for knowledge that arise with
extremely widespread technology which allows anyone to post anything at all, whether true or false, on the internet
to be read, potentially by millions of people.
‘Perspectives’ is one of the four headings which guide the study of all the course components in TOK. As you study
the various systems in which knowledge is made, you will be considering whether we have access to multiple
perspectives or not, and if not, whether we can say that we have managed to create maps which reflect sound
understanding of what actually happened.
A final note about perspective: in some kinds of knowledge, differing perspectives are not helpful or relevant. There
can be no different perspective on the fact that your favourite dinner is your mother’s homemade lasagne. There can
be no different perspectives on the laws of physics. The physical properties of the Universe are what they are; they
are not subject to different interpretations by people from different cultures.
Different perspectives can be helpful in many circumstances in the development of scientific or mathematical
knowledge – someone else might give you a new perspective on how to solve a problem or design an experiment.
However, the knowledge that is ultimately constructed is not going to be subject to reinterpretation from people who
see things differently. In fact, the idea that there can be different perspectives on reality is one of the problems for
knowledge in the world today. We saw in the introduction that people cannot stop their children from getting
measles and potentially dying because they have a personal perspective on vaccines. Similarly, we cannot stop the
ocean from continuing to rise as fast or faster than it did in the last 25 years (more than 3 inches), causing significant
changes to coastal land and affecting both land use and weather patterns (Nunez), just because we have a different
perspective on the question. We can certainly benefit from different perspectives on how to solve the problem and
how to deal with the consequences, but what happens as a result of the rising temperatures of the oceans is not a
matter of perspective; it is a matter of the physical nature of the oceans. As you work through your TOK course, you
will need to attend to those situations in which different perspectives can enrich our knowledge, as opposed to those
in which perspective is simply not relevant.
You may have noticed the many times that the word ‘power’ has appeared in the discussion of the concepts so far.
‘Knowledge is power’ has become a well-known cliché, and, indeed, there are obvious ways in which it is true.
Movies and television shows by the dozen are based on unscrupulous people exploiting their knowledge for
wicked purposes. Blackmailers, thieves and other ne’er-do-wells use their knowledge as a tool in order to benefit
themselves. Clearly this is not the sort of power we are interested in with regard to knowledge in TOK. Knowledge
is, nevertheless, a source of power.
There are two ways in which we want to consider the concept of power in relation to knowledge:
• the way in which knowledge gives us power
• the way in which those who have power in a particular society or group control the knowledge that gets made and
distributed.
Knowledge from the various areas of knowledge gives us a particular kind of power over our lives. Knowledge of
the natural sciences, for example, gives us, individually and in communities, power over our environment and
allows us to improve the quality of our lives. Knowledge put men on the Moon. Knowledge put your mobile phone
in your hand and allows us to fly from one side of the world to another. Knowledge, as we have seen, has allowed us
to eradicate diseases, and lack of knowledge has caused some people to bring those vanquished diseases down on
the heads of their children. Knowledge of other people allows us to communicate, to form alliances and to solve
problems. As we saw from Josef Stalin’s attempt to completely rewrite the history of his country in order to convey
a whole set of assumptions and values that fit his plan for controlling the nation, knowledge of history gives us the
power that comes with understanding the values our countries are founded upon and why. It provides us with
guidance about how to behave if we are to live up to the ideals that have shaped our current social and governmental
practices. Knowledge tells us when the time has come to rise up against injustice and help to steer a community or
nation or the world toward a better course.
One other important way in which the concept of power is related to our understanding of how knowledge works in
the world is the question of who has the power to make and distribute knowledge. We mentioned an example of this
earlier in the discussion of the concept of perspective as it relates to making knowledge in history. The idea that
history has long been written by winners is a way to express the fact that the winners have had the power over how
the stories of many historical events have been told. The people with the power to disseminate their version have the
power to shape the knowledge that others will have.
Power over the knowledge-making process is not limited to the field of history, of course. We also saw how
scientific research into the connection between vaccines and autism was misrepresented due to the power of some
companies who were funding the research. In that case, the power of a commercial interest led to findings which
were inaccurate, and which have proven to be extremely difficult to correct – even after nearly 30 years – and which
have had serious consequences for people around the world.
RELATED IDEAS
A concept related to power is freedom.
Although the concepts in this chapter appear in alphabetical order, ‘responsibility’ is a very appropriate concept to
follow immediately after power. Maybe you have heard another common saying: ‘with freedom comes
responsibility’. This cliché has become so common because it gets at an almost universal ethical belief: that when
one has enough power to free oneself from the control of other people or of nature, one has an obligation to use it
wisely.
Most people would say that when one has power, one has an obligation to use it for the good of all, not just for the
good of oneself. It follows then, that most people would concur with the idea that, since our knowledge confers
power upon us, our knowledge should be used wisely – for the good of everyone.
All the professional areas of knowledge, in fact, have formal codes of ethics that guide the generation of knowledge
within that area so that the responsibility for making accurate knowledge is formalized and the practices which will
lead to that accurate knowledge are identified and mandated. Practitioners in all the areas of knowledge who are
caught violating those codes of ethics are censured and, very often, stripped of the right to continue to work in that
field, as Andrew Wakefield was for his unethical work in claiming a non-existent tie between vaccines and autism.
In fact, much of our knowledge is used to ensure good for everyone:
• Technologies are developed in order to make people’s lives easier or better.
• Medical knowledge allows people to live longer, healthier lives.
• Knowledge of history and law has helped many people get the justice they deserve.
• Knowledge of psychology has helped people to overcome mental illness.
• Knowledge of biology and ecology has helped provide drinking water to people around the globe – even in areas
of extreme desert.
• Knowledge of mathematics has helped to build skyscrapers and bridges.
Not all knowledge is used for good, however, and not all good has extended to all people:
• Many people are wrongly incarcerated despite our having knowledge about how to interpret evidence such as that
obtained from DNA.
• Many people do not have the food, water or medical supplies that they need.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
• Despite widespread availability of cellular technology and the internet, many people – even in developed countries
such as the US – do not have access to those services.
• Knowledge led to the atomic bomb and the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Japanese citizens at the end of the
Second World War.
• Many individuals do what is ethically wrong, even though they know what is ethically right.
All of these circumstances lead to questions that you will pursue throughout your TOK studies:
• Who must be responsible for the knowledge we have?
• Are the people who make or discover the knowledge more responsible than the people who use that knowledge?
• Do we have a responsibility to ensure that the benefits of knowledge reach everyone, rather than just a privileged
few?
• What do you, as an individual, have responsibility for with regard to the knowledge that you seek or the claims
with which you are presented?
As you study the themes and areas of knowledge, consider what the concept of responsibility reveals about why the
methods that are used have been developed.
A final note about power and responsibility: neither of these concepts seems to be very complicated, but they both
reveal a very important idea about Theory of Knowledge – the course content is very serious. Sometimes in school
we wonder why we have to study what we have to study or when we will ever use our knowledge of how to solve a
problem in mathematics or our knowledge of the importance of structure in Shakespeare’s Hamlet or our knowledge
of the history of China under the rule of Mao Tse Tung. Theory of Knowledge offers you two important
opportunities:
• By understanding the power that different kinds of knowledge confer on people in the world, you will be able to
answer those questions about why you have been required to study the things you study in school.
• Theory of Knowledge itself, because it is, in part, about how you as an individual can gain power over your life –
true independence – and about what responsibilities you will incur because of that power, is a course with direct
application in your life and throughout your life.
RELATED IDEAS
Concepts related to responsibility are:
• power
• freedom
• independence.
The concept of truth sometimes seems to be a scary one for Theory of Knowledge, because the nature of truth is a
massive question in the formal study of philosophy, and can be both complicated and distancing. The Stanford
Encyclopedia of Philosophy, for example, describes one aspect of the philosophical question of truth this way:
These theories all attempt to directly answer the nature question: what is the nature of truth? They take this
question at face value: there are truths, and the question to be answered concerns their nature. In
answering this question, each theory makes the notion of truth part of a more thoroughgoing metaphysics
or epistemology. Explaining the nature of truth becomes an application of some metaphysical system, and
truth inherits significant metaphysical presuppositions along the way. (Glanzberg)
You can see that trying to tangle with concepts such as ‘thoroughgoing metaphysics’ or ‘epistemology’ and
‘metaphysical presuppositions’ would be enough to make most people run for cover. Fortunately for us, however,
these extremely abstract notions surrounding the nature of truth are not relevant to the role of truth in the specific
context of knowledge in TOK. In TOK, we are concerned with a much more direct concept of truth, which we have
already described in the introduction to this book. The Theory of Knowledge course is predicated on an essential
assumption that reality exists outside of our minds. That is to say: TOK rejects the philosophy of solipsism, which
is the idea that there is no external reality, and that since it’s impossible to experience anything at all that doesn’t
pass through our minds, we cannot say with any degree of certainty that anything exists at all except our minds.
We acknowledge that our acceptance of the existence of an external reality is an assumption, but we also accept that
that assumption accords with experience. If, for example, we assume that the wall ahead of us is really there, and is
not just a figment of our imagination, we will not run headlong into it, smashing our forehead and giving ourselves a
concussion. If, on the other hand, we assume that the wall is not real, and we therefore run into it, we will suffer the
pain of our assumption. Would running headlong into the wall prove with absolute certainty that the wall is there
and not simply an artefact in our minds? No, it will not. One could make a fairly complicated argument that the pain
is also a creation of our solipsistic mind, and that it is, therefore, no more ‘real’ than the wall is, but such an
argument seems pretty frivolous. If all the consequences of our behaviours are exactly the same in a solipsistic
universe as they are in a universe which is real, then there is no difference between them, and we might as well
behave as if the Universe is, in fact, real.
We have thousands of years’ worth of experience as a species which tells us that when we have solid knowledge –
when we are certain or absolutely certain – we have power over our environment, ourselves and our lives. We also
have experience that tells us when we are wrong, when we only think we know or when we believe in things which
are not real, we do not have that control, and we suffer consequences that are not at all desirable. Remember the man
who thought that the man-eating tiger’s behaviour was all a matter of his mental control? He did not survive his
delusion long enough to realize the error of his ways.
For the purposes of Theory of Knowledge, then, we know the truth when we understand, and are able to explain,
reality accurately.
All of the various areas of knowledge and themes of the course focus on different aspects of that reality: the physical
Universe, the quantification of relationships among objects, of speed and motion, of politics and language, of human
behaviour and past events, and so on. In each different area, we will be examining the effort to know the truth about
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
those different elements of human life and experience, as well as about physical reality. People working in each of
those areas will study different materials and use different procedures in order to do the studying. Our efforts to
know in each area will be guided by ethical concerns, and many of those areas will look different, or be approached
differently, by people with different perspectives. By considering the generation of knowledge in all these different
domains, we will be looking at the ways in which truth is identified – and the degree to which it is possible to
actually recognize and describe any meaningful truths.
Much of your TOK course will reveal to you the problems that we face in trying to know, but that does not mean
that knowledge is not achievable. The fact that truth is a central course concept is a reminder to you that our journey
through the problems we face as a species, in trying to make knowledge in many different contexts, do not
ultimately stop us from knowing. Our understanding of the obstacles and the means by which we overcome them is
a primary means of helping us understand how we know, when we know and why we know.
RELATED IDEAS
Concepts related to truth are:
• assumption
• reality
• solipsism
• accuracy
• certainty
• absolute certainty
• methods
• ethics
• perspectives.
The twelfth and final central course concept is values. By now, we have already touched on a good many values that
are relevant to our exploration of knowledge in this course. We have seen how the IB mission statement embodies
the value of respecting other people’s perspectives and how that value relates to our understanding of how to use our
knowledge. We have also seen how values shape our knowledge through the culture in which we live and in which
we seek and apply our knowledge.
We have also seen some of the values that underlie the Theory of Knowledge as a course: the value of independence
and the ability to have power over one’s life and environment, as well as the value of gaining and using our
knowledge wisely and ethically. We have seen that while we value absolute certainty, we do not value it as the
primary goal for determining whether we know something or not. Finally, with regard to values that have shaped the
course, we have raised questions about the value of knowledge itself. You will continue to explore all of these
aspects of the relationship between values and knowledge as you proceed.
There are also values inherent to each of the knowledge domains that we will examine in the course. We have seen
that each professional area of knowledge has a code of ethics, which reveals that they all value accuracy and
responsibility. As you study each area of knowledge and each of the required and optional themes, you will also
consider what it reveals about what we value as humans. The scope of each area implies something about what we
value about our lives and experiences. The methods imply something about what we value about accuracy and
precision. Our investigation into perspectives will imply something about our valuing of different ways of seeing the
world and different ways of doing things, and our exploration of the ethical ramifications within each domain will
imply things about what we think of as fundamentally right and wrong. In short, all the aspects of each of the areas
you will study in your Theory of Knowledge course reveal what we value in our communities, be they groups as
small as a family or as large as the entire population of the world.
Perhaps the value with the biggest implications for knowledge is the value we place on truth, on having knowledge
that is accurate enough to be functional. If you understand that, then you understand that serious practitioners in all
areas take their responsibilities seriously. When that happens, we can trust the knowledge that is generated and
shared.
RELATED IDEAS
Concepts related to values are:
• certainty
Learner profile
Knowledgeable
How does studying TOK through concepts help us to become more knowledgeable about how
knowledge is constructed in all the themes and areas of knowledge?
Learner profile
Reflective
What shapes my perspective as a knower?
ACTIVITY
Select one item that you can see from where you are sitting right now. Try to list all the different knowers
responsible for the fact that the item currently sits in the room where you are.
In this chapter, we will think about the individual in relation to all this knowledge held by the culture and by
communities. As individuals, we all hold knowledge and, hopefully (especially as you are a student), you are
gaining more and more knowledge each day. The culture which has this knowledge has developed systems and
processes which pass some of it on to individual knowers. In many cases, the individuals will then take on this
knowledge and add to it, change it, develop it or even overturn it. This type of knowledge held by an individual is
often referred to as ‘personal knowledge’ because it relates to those things which you can say that you know. You
know how to do things, for instance, that others might not. This might extend from knowing how to juggle to
knowing how to solve quadratic equations. You might know facts as well, for instance the chemical equation for
photosynthesis; this knowledge might have been developed or discovered by other individuals and accepted by
communities, but you have it now. You might also know things that no one else can know. This could be knowledge
of how you feel right now (tired, grumpy, worried, confident), or knowledge of your opinion about certain events or
facts. We might agree on certain facts, say, about the amount of waste a city produces (an example of shared
knowledge), but differ on our opinions on what, if anything, should be done about it (an example of personal
knowledge).
We will explore our understanding of ourselves as individual knowers. The TOK subject guide calls this section ‘the
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
core theme’, meaning it should play a significant part in your thinking about knowledge during the course. The idea
is that in all situations you act as both a member of some community of knowers, but also as an individual who
accepts knowledge from that community, and also contributes to it. Throughout the course, when you are thinking
about the role of technology, language and politics, when you are thinking of the knowledge held by Indigenous and
religious communities (the optional themes) and when you are thinking about the knowledge held by the more
formal communities of mathematicians, scientists (natural and human), historians and artists, you should be thinking
about what the role of the individual in that community is. You should also think about what your role is in those
contexts too. This course is not only about knowledge ‘out there in the world’; you and your knowledge are at the
‘core’ of the whole experience.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do individual experts in an AOK manage to have their knowledge accepted by other experts in that
AOK?
In the Scope section we’ll explore what knowledge is thought to be and why it is different from belief or opinion.
There we will also explore the idea that knowledge is often developed in the context of a community and how our
individual knowledge is often best seen as being in relation to such communities. The Perspectives section builds on
this in thinking about how our individual perspective is constructed by a network of different factors and
communities. The Methods and tools section explores the various ways that individuals gain their knowledge.
Finally, in the Ethics section we’ll look at the sort of knowledge we call ‘ethical knowledge’ and consider how that
is developed and what its impact might be.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the knowledge or experience of an individual have the same relevance in the construction of
knowledge in different AOKs?
Throughout this section we will be using a number of terms which are helpful in describing knowledge and how
knowledge relates to the world.
• Facts are how the world is, or how things actually are, whether you know it or not. There is, for instance, a fact
about the number of people in Thailand surfing at this moment in time, but there’s no practical way of finding that
fact out. But there is a fact of the matter and the truth of any guess I made would be true only if it corresponds to
that fact.
• Claims or propositions are statements made by people stating what they think might be a fact. I might claim or
propose that ‘there are 1 357 people surfing in Thailand right now’. Claims and propositions can be true or false.
If I claim that the Earth is flat, I’d be saying something that is false because there is no fact in the world that this
claim corresponds to (no matter what YouTube tells you!). Much of what this course is about is under what
conditions claims can be considered as knowledge.
• A truth is another name for a claim or proposition which has been shown to be or is accepted as true. ‘The Moon
orbits the Earth’ is a truth, as is, ‘The internal angles of all triangles are equivalent to two right angles’. We’re
differentiating ‘a truth’ from ‘true’ because we have seen throughout history that many times what we called ‘a
truth’ turned out not to be true at all. ‘The body is made up of four humours’ was once considered a truth but it
was never true: it was merely a claim that people thought was true but wasn’t.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What criteria can we use to distinguish between knowledge, belief and opinion? Are these criteria the
same in different AOKs or in different communities of knowers?
IA prompt
1 What counts as knowledge?
The vast majority of creatures on the planet demonstrate no interest in knowledge about the world; they just get on
with the business of living in it. Bats, banana slugs and Bengal tigers simply carry on what they do without any
thought about what knowledge is, or how it is constructed. Their approach to reality is simply to live in it, try to find
food in it and try not to be someone else’s food in it.
ACTIVITY
Draw three columns on a piece of paper and label them ‘Opinion’, ‘Belief’ and ‘Knowledge’.
1 Think of five examples of claims that you would place under each category.
2 Compare them with a partner and discuss any ways in which your partner would have categorized
your choices differently.
3 Can you create some principles which you can use to identify unique characteristics or which would
differentiate the three from one another?
You might have found that there was some disagreement, but that there was a lot of agreement as well. All three are
forms of ‘belief’; that is, they are claims about something which we in some sense ‘believe’. They might also all be
seen on a sort of spectrum where knowledge is the stuff that is in some sense ‘truest’.
You might have found that they are different in the degree to which they can be thought of as ‘subjective’ or
whether or not different people might think differently about them. ‘I like 90s indie pop’, for instance, while an
objective fact about an individual’s musical tastes, doesn’t really mean that others should feel the same way. ‘90s
indie pop is good music’, could be just another way of saying ‘I like it’ and is an opinion. Opinions are thought of as
‘subjective’ in that what makes the claim true or false depends on an individual’s taste (although, inevitably, some
opinions are closer to knowledge than others, hence the phrase ‘expert opinion’). In a sense, then, opinions state
truths about an individual. When we investigate an opinion, we don’t really have to look much further than the
person saying it as it is their holding that opinion that is important.
Examples of these sorts of claims might include:
Set 1:
• Peanut butter is good.
• Paris is beautiful in the spring.
• Hot chocolate is best served with buttered toast.
• Watching the sunrise over Ankor Wat is overrated.
• Euler’s Identity is a thing of beauty.
• Chemistry is hard.
But there are other examples of claims which don’t fit easily into this category.
Set 2:
• The events of 9/11 changed the world.
• Religious belief and practice bring out the best in people.
• Religious belief and practice bring out the worst in people.
• Liverpool FC deserves the praise it receives.
• The US Union Army’s Siege of Petersburg was the beginning of the Confederate defeat.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
• Japan’s attack on Pearl Harbor was simply a diversion for their attack on the Malay Peninsula.
• Acupuncture works for back pain.
• Abortion should be legal.
These claims might simply refer to an individual’s taste, but they also could be thought of as making a claim about
the world, and, in this regard, they are quite distinct from opinion. They might be true, and this wouldn’t necessarily
depend on whether I happen to think the claims are true. ‘Belief’ and ‘knowledge’ are similar in this way, and
different from ‘opinion’. These claims can be supported or challenged by evidence and we might argue about them
in the hopes that we might convince others that we are right and that they should believe it as well. Similarly, we
might find that the weight of evidence against a claim such as those above might mean that we give it up, or don’t
accept it anymore. These claims might be thought of as ‘objective’ in that what makes them true or false might be
found in the world, and not simply in my own subjective tastes.
So, what about the list below? Do they represent another kind of belief? Identify what you think might be different
about Set 2 and Set 3.
Set 3:
• The force on an object is equal to its mass multiplied by its acceleration.
• Mitochondria provide cells with energy needed to function.
• India became independent from Britain in 1947.
• The quantity of a wanted good is inversely proportional to its price.
• The Dharma are the fundamental teachings of Buddha.
• Dick Fosbury represents a huge shift in the high jump community.
• Nico Rosberg won the Formula 1 World Championship in 2016.
•
• Hobbits have hairy feet.
The beliefs in this set seem less open to debate in the way that those in Set 2 are, though they still might have been
contentious. Many of the same things we said about the second set of claims can be said of this third set: that they
are evidence based; that we might convince others that they are true, but there is a sense in which the debate about
whether they are true or false has been completed – we accept these as true. Some are the outcome of a lot of
experiment and discovery and some are definitions, but they all represent truths about the world that some group of
people can be said to ‘know’ or might reasonably be called ‘knowledge’. We might characterize the claims in Set 2
as ‘beliefs’ which have yet to be decided (indeed, if it is even possible to decide once and for all) and the claims in
Set 3 are examples of what we might call ‘knowledge’.
But what exactly is the difference between ‘belief’ and ‘knowledge’? This is a question that has challenged scientists
and philosophers for thousands of years, but it is pretty well accepted that it has something to do with two things:
truth and justification.
The suggestion is that some beliefs can be promoted to ‘knowledge’ provided particular criteria are met – they need
to be true and they need to be justified. What makes some claim or another true and justified, however, can be a very
tricky issue. As individual knowers we find ourselves caught between what appear to be competing claims for
knowledge. In some communities, claims might be considered true and justified, but another community might not
accept that the claim is either true or justified. Different communities often set up different criteria for what makes a
claim true, or what makes a claim justified. The same claim might be accepted as true by individuals in one group
but not accepted by individuals in other groups.
Investigating and analysing these criteria are partly what the Theory of Knowledge course is about.
Correspondence theory
In some cases, a claim can be said to be true if it corresponds with facts about the world. So were I to claim that the
statement ‘Mitochondria provide cells with the energy needed to function is true’, what I mean is that there really
are mitochondria in cells and they really do provide the energy needed to function. There is a fact about
mitochondria and cells and my claim captures and describes that fact, and this is what it means for that claim to be
true. The claims you find in biology, chemistry, physics or other sciences generally follow this sort of understanding
of truth. An important part of this is that it doesn’t matter what I think about the world, or what I think about the
claim, some claims are just true or false depending on how the world actually is. People who claim that ‘the Earth is
flat’, for instance, are simply mistaken, because there is a fact about the world’s shape, regardless of what they think
about it. The actual shape of the Earth simply does not correspond with the claim ‘the Earth is flat’.
Coherence theory
Some of the other claims in Set 3 above are less clearly associated with a fact in the world. These claims cannot
really correspond to the world in the same way as the others, as it is not entirely clear what in the world they’d apply
to. The trigonometry identity or the claim about hobbits’ feet don’t obviously correspond to the actual world, but
we’d still want to say that they are true and that we know them.
Another way to think about truth is to say that some claim is ‘true’ when it is coherent with all the other true claims
in a system. When investigating whether hobbits have hairy feet, we might see what else is true in the world of
Middle Earth. We would find that, indeed, ‘Hobbits are little human-like creatures with oddly hairy feet’ and that
this fact is consistent with other truths in that world. So the claim that ‘hobbits have hairy feet’ is true. Were I also to
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
say that ‘Gandalf is the name of the King of the Elves’, this claim contradicts all that we know about Middle Earth,
so we’d say that this claim is false, even though there is no fact in this world which would ever show it to be true or
false (unless you consider the book The Lord of the Rings as the object which shows it to be false).
Mathematics is generally accepted to be true in this sense; it’s hard to see just what is being described by
mathematical equations. We don’t bump up against numbers and sine and cosine in the world, but we know that
certain mathematical truths are still available. What makes the quadratic formula equivalent to quadratic equations
isn’t some fact about the world around us, but rather facts about the system of mathematics (see Chapter 8 for a more
sophisticated examination of knowledge claims in mathematics).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do we distinguish claims that are contestable from claims that are not?
Some claims seem to occupy a middle ground. Measuring the supply and demand of goods and relating them to
price, for instance, isn’t as straight forward as getting out a microscope and tape measure. ‘Supply’ and ‘demand’
are concepts that relate to general behaviours of groups of people. Although we might measure and tally particular
instances of people wanting to buy particular items, this isn’t quite the same as measuring the ‘demand’ in the
market for that good. These concepts, while they build on individual instances of real-world actions, are also truths
about concepts which exist as ideas, not objects.
ACTIVITY
1 Compile a number of knowledge claims that you find in your various IB Diploma Programme subjects.
2 Try to identify exactly what corresponds with the world in terms of observing their truth.
3 What knowledge do you already need to have to make sense of the new knowledge you are learning
or constructing in your classes?
4 Can you identify which theory of truth (correspondence or coherence) adequately captures your
different subjects? What are the implications for the ‘reliability’ of the AOK if a clear type of truth can’t
be found?
In summary, knowledge isn’t just whatever you want it to be. We all have a number of thoughts about the external
world in our head and only some of them really deserve to be called ‘knowledge’. I might really like peanut butter,
but that doesn’t mean that I ‘know’ that peanut butter is good. At best this means nothing more than ‘I like peanut
butter’. Some facts like these are best thought of as opinions. The distinction between what we can know or what we
believe or have opinions about, however, isn’t always clear.
IA prompt
19 What counts as a good justification for a claim?
Why is justification necessary? Why not just accept that when a belief is true then we should accept it as
knowledge? Simply believing something that is true cannot be considered ‘knowledge’ for a number of reasons.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Why are the criteria for what counts as knowledge not obvious?
What reasons do you have for believing the sorts of things you believe? Sometimes these reasons can be a challenge
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
to articulate. Sometimes they can be a challenge to even identify. At the level of the individual we can explore the
reasons why people accept beliefs through a number of cognitive tools. These cognitive tools are psychological
processes which individuals might appeal to as reasons for knowing some claim or another. Here are some possible
sources for an individual’s knowledge (we’ll explore these in more detail later):
• memory
• reason
• imagination
• language
• sense perception
• faith
• emotion
• intuition.
All of these sources (and perhaps many others) help us explain why we think we know what it is that we claim to
know. In some cases, one of these might take precedence while others are less important. When deriving the
quadratic formula from a quadratic equation, for instance, my emotions play a lesser role to the deductive processes
of reason. Emotions, however, might play a more prominent role when exploring the arts. Empathy or some forms
of imagination might play a larger role in constructing claims in the study of history, as it is important to consider
the thoughts, motives and feelings of the historical figures we’re studying.
At the individual level, however, these sources may lead us astray. Memory, for instance, is a notoriously unreliable
source of knowledge: we might be utterly convinced that we remember some event correctly, but there are all sorts
of reasons why our memories lead us astray.
We might use these cognitive tools together in order to help establish when one is leading us away from knowledge
that we can properly justify.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do different AOKs or communities of knowers have different ideas about what makes a good
justification?
If, for example, I said that ‘The Truman Show is a good film because of Peter Weir’s direction’ then my claim now
has a justification, one that I might use in explaining why you should also think that The Truman Show is a good
film. This sort of discussion will be familiar with students taking the arts as their IB Group 6 subject and the sort of
analysis you use when analysing novels and poems from your Group 1 language course. There, you are making
arguments about the quality of works of literature and justifying those arguments with reference to features of the
works themselves.
In other words, if I use justifications as reasons why I think some claim is true, I might use those same justifications
to give you reasons why you should believe the claim as well. To do this effectively, however, you and I need to
CASE STUDY
The OPERA experiment at CERN
In a 2010 experiment called OPERA, the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN)
laboratories were investigating the nature of neutrinos when they appeared to have found evidence that
some of these neutrinos could travel faster than the speed of light. This contradicted the established
‘rules’ of physics, partly put in place by Albert Einstein in the early twentieth century. Einstein claimed
that no object with mass can travel faster than the speed of light. The data from the CERN laboratory
was therefore very contentious.
This finding, however, didn’t mean that Einstein and all the accepted theories were suddenly called into
question. The community of physicists have well-established methods and rules which govern whether
the claims and findings of an individual scientist (or laboratory) are accepted by the community. Before
any surprising result can be accepted, the surprising claims must undergo careful review by other
scientists; this is the bedrock of what is called ‘the scientific method’, which is designed to mitigate the
inaccuracies which can sometimes work their way into the experiments of individual scientists. The
OPERA team, accepting these rules of how to do science, made their processes and data public in the
expectation that other scientists would repeat the experiments and would compare the new data with the
OPERA team’s initial findings. If the work of other scientists was consistent with the results of the
OPERA experiment, then this would be further justification that OPERA’s claims corresponded to facts in
the world and might give reasons why Einstein’s rules about objects not travelling faster than the speed
of light might be flawed.
What this process of reviewing showed, however, was that there were issues with the initial experiment.
When another set of scientists tried to replicate their findings, their new data showed that the
measurements of the speed of the neutrinos were, in fact, consistent with Einstein’s initial principle. In
the end, in the face of these new data and findings, the original OPERA scientists accepted that their
data was flawed and backed down from their claims that the neutrinos might have broken the
established laws of physics.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
What this example shows is that even if an individual has justification and reasons for their knowledge,
there are rules around whether a community should accept that knowledge. The OPERA team accepted
these rules and conventions and followed them even though they are designed directly to challenge their
findings.
For a more in-depth discussion of the scientific method, see Chapter 9 (The Natural Sciences).
In addition to thinking about what constitutes knowledge, it is also useful to think about the different forms that
knowledge takes.
Propositional knowledge
As students, you are spending a lot of time in school learning theories and facts. Each subject has a ‘body of
knowledge’ that, as a student in that field, you are expected to know. Knowledge of facts, knowledge that is ‘true’ in
that it corresponds to some fact in the world is often called ‘propositional knowledge’, because claiming to know
something is to propose that something is true or real. In other words, people could agree with you about something.
This form of knowledge can usually be translated as ‘I know that …’ followed by a claim.
Here are some examples of propositional knowledge:
• ‘I know that California became a state in 1850.’
• ‘I know that Braham is the fundamental creative principle in Hinduism.’
• ‘I know that quadratic equations have two solutions.’
• ‘I know that a water molecule has two hydrogen atoms.’
• ‘I know that the population of China is around 1.4 billion.’
• ‘I know that The Police released their album ‘Zenyatta Mondatta’ in 1980.’
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do the different communities of knowers that you belong to have different types of propositional
knowledge?
Much of what you are doing in your classes day by day is learning propositional knowledge, and much of what you
will be assessed on in the next exam session is your ability to recall that information In addition, you might belong
to different groups or communities of knowers that focus on particular facts which others might not know or care
about.
Propositional knowledge is often the result of a process or a method of deriving such truths. The methodologies of
the various AOKs are designed to create this knowledge. In each of these cases I have a belief that can then be tested
using the various methodologies and can finally be justified through some sort of evidence. The form of justification
might be unique to the particular AOK, but in each of the cases there can be a consensus reached through some sort
of public analysis.
Ability knowledge
Claims to know something might take another form, however. Ability knowledge refers to abilities or skills that I
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What do the various communities of knowers that you belong to expect you to know how to do?
In addition to the propositional knowledge that you are learning in your classes, you are also (perhaps more
importantly) learning a range of skills. Take learning a language for instance: to be able to speak a language, you
will need to know a lot of facts about the language. To be able to speak Portuguese, for instance, you will need to
know that Onde está Pedro? translates to ‘where is Pedro?’ in English but knowing this isn’t (yet) speaking
Portuguese. Genuinely knowing how to speak a foreign language requires a lot of this sort of propositional
knowledge, and you will need to have the ability to use this vocabulary nearly instinctively.
Knowing how to do something and being skilled at it are also quite different. I might know how to play Gaelic
football, but I am certainly not skilled at it. I may be able to explain some of the rules (‘I know that you must kick or
hand pass the ball after four steps’ – which is an example of propositional knowledge), and I might know enough of
these rules to be able to enact a few basic drills or play casually with a group of friends. I would not, however,
pretend to be skilled enough to play in a genuine match. I simply do not have the skills and I would undoubtedly end
up hurt.
The fact that ability knowledge is required is clear when it comes to communities of sportsmen and women, but
what about other more formal knowledge communities?
ACTIVITY
1 With a friend from another class, think of your most recent IB assessment. Make a list identifying both
the propositional knowledge and the ability knowledge that was being assessed.
2 Which type of knowledge do you think is most important in terms of ‘being skilled’ in the subject?
In each of the AOKs and in each of the individual disciplines within those AOKs, there is of course a ‘body of
knowledge’ that you will be expected to know in order to do well on your exams or to be part of that AOK-
community. However, there are a lot of other skills and abilities that you’ll need to know in order to genuinely excel.
In philosophy, knowing that a philosopher developed a theory is good, but to be a good philosopher you’ll have to
know how to use that information in the service of your own argument. Knowing the net worth of a company might
be important in a business management case study, but you will also have to be able to use that information in an
analysis to show top-level skills in your assessment.
IA prompt
14 Does some knowledge belong only to particular communities of knowers?
A ‘community of knowers’ would be one way of describing such communities. Again, the terms are quite broad, but
they refer to groups of people who share beliefs, theories, experiences and ideas. We might, for example, speak of a
city’s ‘Spanish-speaking community’ or its ‘English-speaking community’ in cities where those languages are not
the primary language. (It would be odd to speak of Trondheim’s ‘Norwegian-speaking community’ since that would
include nearly everyone in the city.) In identifying these ‘communities’, we are grouping people together in relation
to their linguistic knowledge.
The other communities mentioned above might also be characterized in terms of knowledge, beliefs, ideas or
theories. The LBGTQ+ community of knowers would share much by way of experience and interest and while this
might not be knowledge per se, that experience and interest would lead the community members to share much that
is related to knowledge. This could include beliefs and values, political positions, culture and society and perhaps a
knowledge and understanding of a shared history.
DEEPER THINKING
Generalization and stereotyping
Knowledge about the world, and people in the world, is often generalized; that is, the claims are about
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
groups rather than individuals. When economists talk about ‘the market’ or when psychologists talk
about behavioural trends across populations, they are not talking about individuals. Similarly, when
talking about ‘communities of knowers’ we are talking about general features which can be used to
group people together. What might be the dangers of this sort of generalization? How might our thinking
about individuals be influenced knowing that they identify, or we identify them, as part of a group?
Whether justified or not, people might have certain beliefs about these communities, and it might be
unfair to use these beliefs about the community to describe someone in that community. This is the root
of the injustice of ‘stereotyping’, where we place an individual into a community and then unfairly pre-
judge that individual based on what we think is true about that community.
Communities of knowers might also refer to groups that are linked through knowing how to do certain things.
Netball and baseball players, skateboarders, gymnasts and bassists all know how to do specific things and have skills
which bring them into a community. The notion of communities of knowers can also be used to make sense of more
traditional or more formal academic disciplines such as those in the AOKs: historians, mathematicians, biologists
and psychologists all form communities of sorts. In each of these cases, a group of people share propositional and
ability knowledge and can meaningfully engage with one another in relation to that knowledge. There might not be a
single set of knowledge they all share, and they might even disagree on certain claims within their community, but
there are important overlapping beliefs and skills which bring them into a close relationship which they do not share
with others. Not having that knowledge is a way of showing that you do not belong to a community or only stand on
the edge of it. I know that I am not a central member of a community of knowers if I cannot participate meaningfully
in that knowledge.
By way of a loose definition, therefore, we might say that a community of knowers is a group of people who share
similar relationships to a body of knowledge, beliefs, assumptions or opinions. They also share knowledge of
methods about how to build knowledge in the field and are able to collaborate meaningfully in the practice of that
knowledge.
ACTIVITY
Consider the groups that you are part of. They might be social, religious, academic or related to sports or
other skills or interests.
1 Compile a list of knowledge or beliefs that are common or which overlap in that community.
2 What disagreements are there in the community?
3 Are there ways of managing those disagreements?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Are there types of knowledge that are specifically linked to particular communities of knowers?
Being an individual knower in a community of knowers associated with an area of knowledge requires you to make
use of established conventions and knowledge. Think of your teachers. They are individuals who are part of their
discipline’s community of knowers. Being a mathematician or a psychologist or a philosopher means accepting the
knowledge (or at least important aspects of it) of the community. It also means that you have accepted the general
conventions of knowledge construction in that community. Being an astronomer, for example, means accepting that
the data given through spectroscopy is reliable, more reliable, for instance than merely peering into the night sky.
Even in the arts, where you might think the knowledge gained is personal and subjective, the knowledge of
techniques, the history of the medium and the concepts used in the discussion of the quality of art are all shared
among the community. As is the case with language, these conventions might be used to share deeply personal
emotional responses and experiences, but they nevertheless are recognized by others in the community.
Membership criteria
Another way of thinking about individuals and communities is by thinking about what an individual must know or
be able to do to consider themselves a member of a community.
Consider being a member of a religious community. Being Jewish or Hindu or Jain means, among other things, that
you understand certain concepts and accept certain types of knowledge as true. Being part of these communities
means that you know how to participate in certain rituals or that you are able to participate in certain traditions and
activities. To be a full member of a community requires an individual to take part in learning how to do these sorts
of things.
ACTIVITY
1 What communities would you consider yourself a ‘member’ of?
2 What knowledge (propositional and ability) have you gained that makes you a member of this
community?
Likewise, you might know the basic rules of chess and play regularly with friends, in which case you might consider
yourself broadly to be a part of a community of chess players. You might not be an expert, or a particularly good
player, but you would have the knowledge to meaningfully engage to some degree with other members of this
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
community. Considering your knowledge and skills as a whole, you can probably think of all sorts of different
communities of knowers of which you are broadly a part. Think of all the things that you enjoy doing – in each case
you might consider yourself a part of that community of knowers in that you know enough facts and have enough
skill to participate. You might be better at some (closer to ‘expert’) and worse at others (closer to ‘novice’) but you
can be said to be part of that community at some level.
ACTIVITY
What makes an expert more or less reliable? Interview someone who you would consider being in the
same ‘community of knowers’ as you but whom you think is more of an expert than you.
1 Try to identify what makes them more of an expert.
2 Is there anything which they have that you don’t have yet?
3 Is there anything which they have which you cannot have?
Members of communities don’t necessarily all have a similar standing. In many cases, but not all, we easily
recognize when someone is an expert in the group. We have an intuitive understanding that some individuals will be
a more or less reliable voice in that community. Many of us, however, do have quite a bit of knowledge and
experience in a field and would be reliable sources of knowledge when it comes to those fields. Your guitar teacher
(presumably) has a good deal of both knowledge and skill which make them a reliable source of knowledge about
guitar playing. They will know facts about scales and where certain notes are and how they make up chords. They
will know certain skills and techniques, from how to hold the guitar to how and where to place which fingers to
make chords. This is not to say that every guitar teacher is an expert, but simply to suggest that some individuals
have more expertise than others. There is no best guitar player in the world, just like there is no best map of the
world, though we might happily recognize that some players are better in certain respects.
Your subject teachers are another example of people with more expertise than others. In relation to their subject,
your teachers have knowledge of the facts and skills needed to succeed in the context of the IB. This is not, of
course, to say that they are ‘experts’, though of course they might be. Their job is about, among other things, helping
you get through the IB, so their level of expertise needs to be tailored to that task.
IA prompt
22 What role do experts play in influencing our consumption or acquisition of knowledge?
DEEPER THINKING
Privilege and perspective
How does this discussion of experts or expertise help? We’ve suggested that experts are reliable sources of
knowledge, but we must take care when taking advice from those with more expertise, because we should only
accept advice from those who have expertise in the areas we want to know about. If you needed help with your
physics coursework, for instance, you would go to a physics teacher, but not your English literature teacher.
This is because being part of a community of knowers means that you understand the skills and knowledge needed
in that community to excel in that community. Each community will have established rules or conventions which
identify good or excellent knowledge in that community. Becoming part of that community means gaining the
understanding and techniques to produce this quality knowledge. The training your English teacher has received has
not been aimed at producing excellent knowledge in physics.
Similarly, when trying to educate ourselves on particularly contentious issues, like abortion or climate change, we
need to make sure that our sources of knowledge are themselves experts in the field. For example, whatever training
a politician receives when learning to be a good politician isn’t designed for understanding science, so when trying
to understand the science, politicians would do well to ask the experts.
ACTIVITY
1 For each of your subjects, make a list of the knowledge and the skills required to be a successful
‘practitioner’ in that field. Think about what your teachers have asked you to do, what information they
have given you and what skills and knowledge you have developed through your own research.
2 Show this list to your subject teachers and see what they think: are there elements that you have
missed out? Have your teachers ever considered themselves ‘masters’ teaching a trade to
apprentices before?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What shapes my perspective as a knower?
But there’s more. Behind you there is a roaring fire and in front of the fire is a walkway where people with variously
shaped objects pass between you and the fire and their objects cast shadows on the wall in front of you, as if they
were shadow-puppets. You have never experienced the people, nor do you even have the idea that there are people
other than your prisoner-friends, or the idea of a whole other existence beyond your own wall, images and chains.
Your reality is what is real, there it is thrown on the wall in front of you; these images are not the whole story – but
you’re entirely unaware that there’s more to what you see.
This story comes from an ancient Greek text written by a philosopher named Plato who died in Athens about the
year 347 BCE. In his most famous work The Republic, Plato offers this story in what is called ‘The Allegory of the
Cave’. This allegory is used by Plato to make all sorts of points, but at the heart of all the various interpretations is
this dilemma: the prisoners believe that the shifting and vague images dancing about on the wall in front of them is
what is ‘real’ and they are deeply mistaken.
Plato’s point is that we are, in all sorts of ways, very much like these prisoners. We happily accept what is presented
to us as our reality. But, consider for a moment which beliefs, opinions or ‘knowledge’ we have that might be no
more real than the flickering shadows of the cave? If you have ever had the experience of seeing a situation in a new
light and realized that you had previously been mistaken, then you might have a sense of what it must be like for
Plato’s prisoners. For the rest of our beliefs, are we sure that we have it right?
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Now the story continues:
Imagine that one day you are released from your chains and you turn to climb out of the cave. You see the fire
behind you and the people milling about. With a shock you recognize that the fire and these objects are what created
the shadows you previously mistook for reality. The shadows are not real objects at all! You then rise and continue
out of the cave and find yourself in the harsh light of the day. You see the bright Sun above you illuminating the
world around you, even brighter than the fire below. You realize that all this time you’d been living in an illusion;
none of what you thought was real is actually real at all. This is a revelation indeed!
You remember your friends still chained in the darkness below, so you run back into the cave and call down to them.
They hear you but your voice has now become one among the many indistinct voices they hear coming from the
wall in front of them. Perhaps they see your shadow, but they only think that this image is just another of the images
they’ve always seen; the reality of the situation is so far beyond what they even could know that they barely give
you a second thought. Since they are not responding to your calls, you run back down to them and stand before them
and attempt to convince them of what they cannot understand: there is no reality to the shadows in front of them;
what they see is they are an illusion, a vague and pale reflection of the reality of the world outside the cave. Your
presence is a surprise to them, your words of this other reality simply confuses them. They don’t believe you. In
fact, they cannot believe you because they have no ideas or concepts to help them understand this reality beyond
anything they know. They actually think it is you who has lost touch with reality. In order to give you the chance to
prove that you suddenly have not lost your mind, they challenge you to a game of ‘name that image’, the favoured
game from before you left. However, because your eyes are no longer accustomed to the darkness of the cave, and
because you no longer can see the point in this game, you struggle to make sense of the images as well as you used
to and they consider you a miserable failure, thereby making you even less reliable. They are now convinced of your
madness and dismiss you. You have no choice but to leave them to their illusions.
ACTIVITY
Consider some of the beliefs that you once had, but which have changed since you’ve gotten older.
1 Can you identify why your views changed? Was it because of a new experience? New challenges?
New learning?
2 Perhaps the ideas you chose are not ideas that conflict with what you knew before, but simply reflect
a deeper understanding. Try to characterize your thinking in the following terms: ‘I used to think …, but
now I think …’
This story has occupied scholars for the last 2000 years and there are layers and layers of meaning waiting to be
uncovered. In one sense, it is an allegory for the journey of the life-long learner. We are born into a world of existing
facts and beliefs not of our making, utterly convinced by the vague and imprecise notions we learn in our childhood.
As we learn about and see more of the world, we recognize that we have always had so much to learn. Our learning
is genuine – we move on from our childish understandings of the world and replace them with more reliable facts
and beliefs. In some cases, we experience so much and learn so much about the world that we simply cannot return
to our relative ignorance. Imagine finding tales of Father Christmas (Santa Claus) or the Tooth Fairy as convincing
today as you once did. This can be troubling and painful. In the original story, the prisoner’s transition to the harsh
light of day is uncomfortable. He staggers about in the bright light, shading his eyes, but he does become
accustomed to the new environment. It is then that his past environment becomes what is odd and unknowable.
Let us now consider those individuals in the Allegory of the Cave that are wandering about in front of the fire with
various objects whose shadows are cast on to the wall in front of the prisoners. Plato likens them to ‘puppet masters’
because the objects they carry, some of which take the shape of various animals and other people, are like puppets
whose shadows being cast on the wall are being judged as real by the prisoners. In Plato’s story they are nameless,
but who are these puppet masters? If we are like the prisoners in the story, then perhaps there are people, groups,
institutions and processes that cast their own shadows which we accept as ‘real’. Much of what we think – many of
our beliefs – are the result of other people casting their truths into our world, which we often accept without much
reflection. They are, in a sense, responsible for our understanding of the world around us. Who are these puppet
masters casting their shadows?
We find ourselves in the middle of a highly interconnected web of people from whom we learn and who are sources
for our knowledge. Schools are a great example. They are designed to pass on knowledge and information which has
already been discovered and which you simply don’t have time to learn yourself. If you have any hope of learning
what your school leaders have decided you need to learn before leaving school, then you have to accept much of
what you are told and move on. Imagine if you were asked to develop, by yourself, all the knowledge you’ve learned
even this week. Of course, during your IB Diploma Programme experience you will conduct a number of science
experiments, you’ll read a good few novels and write reflective essays on them and you might develop proofs for a
handful of mathematical theorems. However, these exercises are largely so you know how those processes work, not
so that you develop new knowledge. Most of the time you’re being given information that others, sometimes long
ago, have developed and which, hopefully, you can move beyond as your education becomes more specialized.
But who chose which knowledge to pass on to you? Your parents are part of the decision in that the choices they
make have led you to the school you’re in, your curriculum writers at the IB have made choices about what is
essential for DP candidates to know in their subjects, teachers have made choices about what and how to present
those concepts in the classroom and your textbook writers have made choices about what to discuss in the books you
read. You might consider them as similar to the ‘puppet masters’ in Plato’s Allegory of the Cave, who construct the
reality that we happily accept.
Not all is mere illusion of course. Some of the information offered by your puppet masters is true and it would be
right to accept what they pass on to you. For example, it is very useful to have good medical information: knowing
how to treat or prevent dangerous diseases is good to know, especially if you have that disease. However, some of
the other images of reality presented by your puppet masters might not be as helpful, or they might be limiting.
ACTIVITY
From your list of puppet masters, choose a source of knowledge that you think might offer an unreliable,
unhelpful or misleading view of reality.
1 How effective has that image of reality been for your thinking?
2 What learning or experience has made it possible for you to identify that information as unreliable?
Assessment advice
Choose one of your puppet masters and think of a human-made object which is linked to them or it. You
might want to use this object as one of your exhibits in your internal assessment. Perhaps it is something
that this person uses or has created. Think about how that object illustrates something particular about
how that puppet master constructs knowledge.
The idea is that we, as knowers, do not stand in isolation from others around us. Thinking about who or what has
influenced us is very much at the heart of the TOK Programme. As children, we find ourselves living in a world
where there are already many ideas about how the world works, about what is real, about how people should behave
and about what is important or valuable. The point of living in families and societies is so that we can learn from
these groups. It is therefore the responsibility of these groups to pass their understanding and approaches on to the
young in their groups. As we become older, we begin to develop a certain distance from those groups and to think
about which of the beliefs provided to us we want to believe and why. Many of those beliefs are not worth thinking
about, but some are very much worth believing, for a variety of reasons, and we must decide which is which. The
TOK course is one way in which we can understand the importance of this task and develop the skills and processes
to make these decisions.
ACTIVITY
Interview one of your chosen puppet masters.
1 Explain to them the concept of puppet master and why you think this person is one of yours.
2 Explain in what way they have helped shape your reality.
3 Ask them whether they know about the impact they have had on your understanding of the world.
4 Did they reflect on how best to influence you?
5 Do they think they are a reliable influence on your understanding of the world around you?
6 Where do they think they may be less reliable, or may have misled you?
Having thought about your own puppet masters, you might have realized that each of us has many different sources
of knowledge – different puppet masters casting their shadows in various ways. As individual ‘knowers’ we stand in
relation to a number of these sources. In another way of thinking about it, we might find that we are parts of many
different ‘communities of knowers’: groups of people of shared interest, skills and knowledge.
So how can we think about what these puppet masters provide? They give us different maps, different ways of
navigating the world.
You might have found that there was some agreement and some disagreement. The accuracy of the maps depends
mostly on what you mean by ‘accurate’ and this depends largely on what sort of information you want to know. If
you are wondering where countries are in relation to one another, then Maps 3, 4 and 5 will do that job well. If,
however, you are wondering what geographical features you might expect to find in certain places (mountains,
deserts, oceans, jungles) then perhaps Maps 1, 2 and 6 would be more useful. All the maps could tell you what was
directly north or south or east or west of some point, but some present their information in a way that makes this
more easy than others: Map 6 uses these directions but it makes this information hard to read. Map 3 has exactly the
same information as maps we’re used to seeing, but it simply places south at the top as opposed to the normal
convention of placing south at the bottom.
In order to read or follow any map, we must be aware of how the map works and what conventions and assumptions
are written into the creation of the map. There are a number of these assumptions and conventions in the maps on
page 61. The cartographer (map maker) would have made a decision about how to lay out the map and this required
them to decide both how to represent the world and what to represent. Maps 1, 2 and 6 ignore the human and
political features of the world (cities and countries) and instead opt only to tell the reader what the world looks like.
Maps 3, 4 and 5 decide to show only the human and political features. Each map also makes a decision to orientate
itself in a certain direction. This decision is most obvious in Map 3, given that it offers an orientation (the south is at
the top) which we normally don’t see. This decision, however, doesn’t mean that the map is any less accurate in its
depiction of the facts; it’s simply that we don’t normally see south at the top. The point is that we cannot read a map
effectively – we cannot see how it tells us anything about reality – unless we understand and accept these
conventions.
Much of this understanding and acceptance happens non-consciously – when we see maps with north at the top, we
don’t even think about it. When we see maps with south at the top, we can quickly change our understanding and get
on with the task of reading it in the same way as other maps we’re more used to. What we often don’t think carefully
about, however, is what these conventions and assumptions written into the maps lead us to think. Consider the
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
differences between Maps 1 and 2: the physical shapes of the continents are very different, particularly as you look
at the land masses furthest from the equator. Consider Map 1. This is called the Mercator Projection and is what
happens when you take a spherical globe and try to translate it onto a flat page – this results in a stretching effect
where the land masses get distorted to fill in the spaces furthest from the equator; the relative area of the far north
and south land masses become disproportionally large compared to the land masses at the equator. If you are not
using the map to think about the relative land mass, then this poses no problem. But not being aware of this
distortion might lead you into certain false conclusions. You might, for instance, uncritically accept that Greenland
is about the same size as the continent of Africa. However, in terms of land mass, Africa is about 14 times the size
of Greenland. While overemphasizing the size of Greenland, the flip side of this is that the size of Africa is
underemphasized. Africa is an impressively large land mass. The entirety of the USA, China, most of Europe and
India could fit within the area of Africa, yet much of the world treats Africa and its huge countries, people,
traditions, cultures and practices as if it were a homogenous whole. It’s not unreasonable to think this might be
because many maps underestimate its size (The Economist). You can use the QR code to read the article in The
Economist.
Map 2 is a response to this dilemma. This projection, called the Galls-Peters projection, is an attempt to capture the
same information as Map 1 (where the land masses are in relation to one another, and what they look like) but with
the added information of how big the land masses are. However, it’s easy to see how the choice to capture this added
fact of relative land size has created its own distortions; the details of the land masses at the north and south
extremes become nearly impossible to read. So, the choice to prioritize one set of facts has distorted another set of
facts.
Another consequence of the choices made in building these maps is to consider what we think of as important or
valuable. The presentation of the world in Maps 1 and 2 is traditional in Europe, while students growing up in the
United States might recognize Map 4 and students from the Pacific Island nations might recognize Map 5. In other
words, the decision to place one part of the world at the centre of the map suggests that the map values certain areas
over others. This might simply be because the map is intended for one audience and not another. Looking at Map 3
however, it might be jarring because it makes it something of a challenge to find your own country.
There’s nothing bad at work here, but it does lead to some interesting conclusions about how these values get
written into the values we hold today. ‘The Middle East’ and the ‘Far East’, for instance, are phrases that make sense
if we consider ourselves to be starting from Europe. Calling the areas around the Arabian Peninsula the ‘Middle
East’ suggests that they have an identity in relation to Europe, but why should that be the case? Similarly, with the
Far East. We might ask ‘far from what?’ Why should the peoples and countries at the eastern edge of the Asian
continent be far from anywhere? Again, this suggests that Europe is at the centre of it all, but why should this be the
case? By looking at Maps 1 and 2 you might uncritically think that Europe really does sit at the top and centre of the
world. The east Asian countries are pushed off to the edges. Australia ends up ‘down under’ the globe, but it’s not
under anything or down from anything unless you accept that the northern hemisphere should be at the top.
Considering the choices of Maps 3, 4 and 5 is more interesting. The top or the centre of these maps lead their readers
into thinking about what is important.
Many maps use latitude and longitude to divide the world up and help make navigating easier, and here again we
might find hidden assumptions about what is important coded into how we describe the world. The starting point for
longitude is the ‘Prime Meridian’ and this runs through a place called Greenwich in southeast London in the United
Kingdom. That this starting point runs through the UK is not an accident. At the time this feature of maps was being
developed, Britain was home to the best maritime knowledge. It was also the greatest military and colonial power.
The strength and knowledge of Britain at the time gave it the ability to decide that the foundations of the system
used to measure the world begin in Britain. This starting point then has been coded into every navigational map on
the planet today. The Prime Meridian could have been anywhere, except for the particular strengths of a little
country on a little island off the coast of the European continent.
Map 6 is called an ‘Azimuthal Equidistant Projection’ which shows the relative distances from one point on the
Earth. Map 6 has chosen the North Pole as this point, but it could have been any other point on the surface of the
globe. Interestingly, this projection seems to be the favourite with the Flat Earth Society and serves as the model for
the UN logo. The knowledge expressed in this map is different in significant ways from the knowledge expressed in
the other maps. Understanding what is being represented in each of these maps is important so you don’t mistake
what you think is being represented with what is actually being represented.
Another feature of how maps might distort our understanding of the world is illustrated by the old saying ‘the
shortest distance between two points is a straight line’. When looking at any of the maps, were we to try to calculate
how to cover a great distance in the most direct way possible we might apply that basic truth of geometry and simply
draw a straight line. Applying this principle to a sphere, however, will not result in the shortest distance.
Anyone who has taken a long-haul flight from east to west will recognize this immediately when thinking about the
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
maps that most airline TV consoles provide. When travelling from Abu Dhabi in the UAE westward to Los Angeles
on the west coast of the USA, rather than travelling west at all, the flight path takes you directly north over central
Asia, through Russia, clipping the North Pole, then directly south down the west coast of North America to Los
Angeles. This would be something you’d never consider from looking at any of the maps we presented here. In other
words, trying to navigate the real world, simply by applying the map of the world, would have led you to use
rational processes that are misleading. Sure, travelling directly west from Abu Dhabi would eventually get me to Los
Angeles, but the journey would be something like 3 300 km longer in a ‘direct’ path to the west.
Clearly there is no one way to represent the world, it depends precisely on what you have chosen to represent. Any
attempt to create a map must begin with making a whole range of choices. The world that maps represent is
infinitely complex even though maps are necessarily simple: they translate the infinite complexities of the ‘real’
world into a simplified representation of it, highlighting certain aspects and ignoring or possibly distorting others.
In summary we might recognize the following points about maps:
• They require the individual to accept assumptions about how that map works.
• Maps distort reality to some degree and therefore can lead us to false conclusions about the world.
• In choosing what features to include, certain values are written into maps.
• Maps guide our thinking processes in ways that we may not be aware of.
ACTIVITY
1 Draw a timeline of your life. This is a ‘map’ of the time you have been alive. Since you cannot choose
every event of your life to represent, what sorts of events will you choose? What type of story does
your timeline tell a stranger?
2 Now draw a timeline of your life that represents your journey as a ‘knower’. What do you ‘know’ now
and where have you learnt it? What events in your life are relevant to you as a knower? Perhaps you
will include when you started school and when you began the IB Programme. What other important
knowledge have you gained and when did you learn it? Compare your timeline of your journey as a
knower with a fellow student. Note the differences: even though you are both ‘IB students’ (and so
might be similar in terms of what you know), you might have identified quite different moments to
record on your map. Discuss why that might be. Is it possible for two students ever to create the same
map?
3 If you have a social media account like Instagram, Twitter or Facebook, what events are on your feed
and what is not on your feed? What effect would the choices you’ve made have on a stranger’s
impression of you? What kind of person would they think you are? What values and beliefs do you
think are illustrated by the choices you’ve made?
ACTIVITY
1 Individually, create a map of your school, thinking carefully about which information you want to
represent and how you will represent it.
2 Compare your finished map with a partner’s map. What are the similarities and differences? How do
those similarities and differences reflect your respective experiences of the school?
3 How can you decide which is a better map of the school?
Individual maps
We are now in a position to think about these maps in relation to ourselves as individual knowers. Go back to the
timeline you created above and consider the story that map tells about you. What are the main features of that
landscape? What have you included and what have you not included? What other maps can you create which will
still tell us about you? At what point would your map become fiction? What maps do you use to make sense of your
world and what use can we make of this metaphor?
These ‘maps’ will be influenced by the experiences you’ve had growing up, the people you are spending your life
with and the beliefs and expectations of your family, friends, religion and school. None of us use only one map; the
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
maps we use will change depending on the situations we find ourselves in. You might, for example, use a map
provided by the scientific method (see Chapter 9) when working with your lab partner in science while trying to
discover or explain some feature of the world. You will, however, switch to a different map when discussing the
world and your place in it with your religious leader. You might be discussing the same phenomenon, but these
different maps might be looking at completely different things. Perhaps you are thinking about global warming
using an economic map, while your friend looks at it with a biological map, or you might be thinking about abortion
using a women’s rights map while your friend thinks about it using a religious map.
Our approaches to the decisions and actions we make every day are part of a wide variety of goals, desires and
needs. At times you are acting as a sportsperson, other times you are a friend, a son or daughter, a leader or a
follower. In each case you are using a set of principles which help you navigate that moment. Who influences what
features you include on your maps and are those maps reliable?
Think back to the key concepts presented in Chapter 1. How can those concepts help you make decisions about
which maps you want to use? Being a reflective and critical thinker means that you must take responsibility for the
choice of maps that you use. If you want, for instance, to join the community of ‘anti-vaxxers’, then one
consequence of that choice is that you are using a map which tries to make scientific claims about the causes of
autism, but which actually turns its back on years of study by world experts on autism and vaccinations. You can, of
course, interpret the world however you wish (it is your ‘right’ to have an opinion, or in this case ‘use a particular
map’), but this does not by itself make that opinion or map a good opinion or map. To use a map which denies well
established and reliable scientific methods in order to make claims that are exactly opposite to what is real, is like
looking at the Mercator Projection map on page 61 and deciding that Greenland and Africa are the same size. It is
just not true. The map has led you away from reality, rather than helped you navigate reliably through it.
AOKs as maps
The metaphor of knowledge as map is a helpful one which the TOK subject guide uses and which this book will
apply at various points. Knowing the world or creating knowledge about the world is a lot like creating maps of the
world. Various maps will highlight certain information, ignore other information, guide our thinking and possibly
distort our understanding of the world. The knowledge we construct about the world will do these things, too. As
mathematicians construct mathematical knowledge, they will highlight concepts like number and logical deduction,
but might ignore other concepts like culture. A historian, however, will consider culture and its influence on the
individual as important, so will discuss as they construct their historical narratives, but will perhaps ignore the nature
of basic mathematical axioms. Similarly, the artist or philosopher might emphasize the individual experiences of
singular human beings, while the economist might accept they are part of an economic analysis but limit that effect
in favour of developing generalizations about how groups of people tend to behave. Likewise, an artist might
highlight the notion of inspiration and intuition in the artist, while the natural scientist might accept that individual
scientists have moments of inspiration, but make sure that this inspiration has been tested against repeatable and
publicly observable experiments. In other words, each area of knowledge will emphasize and prioritize some aspects
of reality and try to describe those elements, while perhaps leaving other aspects to some other field of knowledge.
The task of the TOK student is to become sensitive to and evaluate those different approaches and maps.
ACTIVITY
1 Consider your IB Diploma Programme subjects. For each, try to develop a set of questions that are
unique to that subject. What types of questions does that subject ask that others might not?
2 What rules do the various approaches follow? Are they similar to or different from the approaches of
the other subjects?
3 Are there better or worse approaches or does it only matter what you’re trying to achieve? What are
the appropriate ways of acting or constructing knowledge in this AOK, and what responsibilities does
an individual have in that AOK?
Learner profile
Reflective
How do my own background beliefs influence the way I engage with the world?
These discussions are a way of exploring what might be called ‘background beliefs’ – beliefs which we hold and use
to make sense of what we see around us. They are in the ‘background’ in the sense that we often are not consciously
thinking of them when we investigate the world, though the beliefs themselves may or may not have been
consciously arrived at.
None of us approach a situation as a blank canvas; we make sense of everything around us through the beliefs and
ideas that we have already formed. People who tend to believe in conspiracy theories are an obvious and extreme
example of this. From fake Moon landings, to the 9/11 attacks in New York City in 2001, many people refuse to
take events at face value and instead see them as masking some deeper truth which most of us are unaware of. These
people are interpreting the world through the lens of their pre-existing beliefs about the way the world is. Often in
conspiracy theories, these beliefs are about secret and powerful groups who want to harm us in some way or another
(whether it be simply ‘keeping us in the dark’ or hiding their true evil intentions). The Flat Earth Society, for
instance, suggests that:
The purpose of NASA is to fake the concept of space travel to further America’s militaristic dominance of
space. That was the purpose of NASA’s creation from the very start: To put ICBMs and other weapons
into space (or at least appear to). The motto ‘Scientific exploration of new frontiers for all mankind’ was
nothing more than a front. (‘The Conspiracy’)
The Flat Earth Society then suggests that NASA scientists cannot know that the Earth is round because ‘They are not
running a real space programme, so they wouldn’t know what shape the Earth truly takes’. What appears to be
happening here is that those responsible for these claims are working with a map or a set of background beliefs
about the nature of the US Government that involve ideas that contradict all available evidence and which will
require further buttressing and intellectual gymnastics when actually presented with facts. The map, in this case, is
not representing the reality common to us all and so is more misleading than reliable.
There are more mainstream examples of the impact of background beliefs. Studies in ‘unconscious bias’, which we
touched on in Chapter 1, are an interesting (and controversial) example of this. The basic idea here is that our
interactions with others are filtered through pre-existing biases which then impact our interactions with people.
These biases usually have the biggest impact in ‘quick thinking’ situations, where people are making fast, non-
reflective judgments in the immediacy of a situation. However, they also have an impact in situations where people
are meant to be reflective.
In 2013, the Equality Challenge Unit (ECU), a group that helps universities in the UK and around the world develop
programmes that promote and protect diversity, explored unconscious bias in relation to hiring practices at
universities (Equality in Higher Education Statistical Report 2013). This was in response to worries identified by the
ECU that the majority of full-time academic positions were held by a disproportionately high number of white staff,
which was inconsistent with the proportions of ethnicities in the student bodies. One reason suggested by ECU for
why the proportion of white academics is inconsistent with the proportion of black and minority ethnic students is
that universities’ hiring practices are influenced by unconscious bias. The suggestion is that hiring committees, even
when they are being reflective and making attempts to be aware of any conscious bias, may nevertheless allow their
unreflective background bias to impact their decisions in reviewing applications, short-listing candidates,
interpreting interview responses and ultimately making job offers. The claim that unconscious biases exist is not the
DEEPER THINKING
Background beliefs and intuition
While these considerations show that in some instances people use their background beliefs to interpret
the world around them, a full TOK analysis would take this a step further. Even if you are not a
conspiracy theorist or involved in university hiring, it is important to consider what background beliefs
you have which have impacted the way that you see the world around you.
What are your own background beliefs? Thinking about who your puppet masters are and what maps
you use to navigate the world are ways to identify and describe these influences. If you are a student at
one of the universities described in the ECU study, for instance, what impact does seeing one ethnic
group over-represented around you have? Does it seem to be ‘normal’ and does this ‘normal’ lead you to
think differently about what is outside this ‘norm’? Another example might be to consider how different
your social, religious, political or economic beliefs and expectations are from those of your parents and
your friends.
Malcom Gladwell’s Blink is an excellent introduction into an implication of how these background beliefs
work in our claiming to know about the world. Gladwell describes a process he calls ‘thin-slicing’, which
refers to making quick, seemingly non-conscious judgments about situations in which people find
themselves. He describes a case in which the art community had accepted a statue, the ‘Getty kouros’
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
as being an authentic statue from the sixth century BC. However, many scholars just weren’t sure –
initially their intuitions were leading them to question the authenticity, but they couldn’t quite justify why
or articulate their misgivings. It turns out that having taken these doubts of a few experts seriously, the
community has arrived at a position where the authenticity of the statue cannot be clearly established.
After some critical reflection and further research it appears that the initial intuitions of the doubters and
their subsequent investigations were warranted. Even today the J Paul Getty Museum suggests that the
statue is from ‘… about 530 BC or modern forgery’ and claims that ‘… the anomalies of the Getty kouros
may be due more to our limited knowledge of Greek sculpture in this period rather than to mistakes on
the part of a forger’ (Getty Museum).
What this suggests is that intuition, even though it is non-reflective or non-rational, can actually be better.
The intuitions of art history experts, for example, can be better than the intuitions of other people and the
reason for this is background beliefs and knowledge. The expert’s wealth of experience, knowledge and
ability means that their non-reflective intuitions about things in their realm of expertise are more finely
tuned. So even when they are not thinking explicitly about a problem, their intuitions should be relied
upon and listened to as authorities in their field.
In this section we’ve explored the sources from which individuals develop their own perspectives on the world and
the conditions under which they do so. We’ve also explored how we can selectively choose how we want to engage
with the world of knowledge, depending on what models and maps we wish to apply to the confusing and
ambiguous reality that we find ourselves confronted with. As we discussed in the introduction, however, these
perspectives and maps do require some connection with the facts of the world around us. There are, in other words,
better and more useful perspectives and maps. A perspective or theory that starts with the assumption that the Earth
is flat, for instance, will not be able to explain all sorts of features of our experience of the world with any precision
or succinctness.
For example, our construction of knowledge about the world might follow this process:
• First, we might experience the world through our senses (sense perception).
• We might then categorize what we are experiencing using memory and language (memory and language).
• From this description we might consider whether it is consistent with what we’ve already experienced in the world
(reason).
• We might even have an emotional reaction to this experience based on what has happened to us before or what we
know about what is happening to us (emotion).
• If we have a question about the reasons for our experience, we might consider and test a number of explanations
(imagination and reason).
• We might even have a ‘hunch’ about what the right explanation is, or a hunch that someone else’s explanation
might be mistaken (intuition).
• There might be some explanations that we inherently trust because they come from a trusted authority in the field
(faith as trust), or because they come from a source to whom we’ve committed ourselves (religious faith).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do we acquire knowledge?
There are all sorts of ways to characterize the cognitive processes by which individuals make claims about the
world. In each case, however, the following should be kept in mind:
• The cognitive tools are intermingled. None of the tools outlined in the diagram above or any others that you
wish to consider, work in isolation. Trying to isolate, for instance, reason and emotion in the consideration of how
we know the world would be like trying to isolate different types of plants in a forest or isolate one single part of
your body when thinking about ‘digestion’. No part works in isolation, all parts work together.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Learner profile
Inquirers
What shapes our personal experience of the world?
• Cognitive tools are influenced by our experience and culture. Even though some of these words refer to
biological processes in humans (sense perception, for instance), this does not mean that they operate the same way
for each of us. What we believe to be ‘reasonable’ might differ dramatically between cultures. When discussing
earthquakes in the Himalayas, for instance, some local cultures will use an explanation which includes mythical
beasts battling it out underground and consider this perfectly ‘reasonable’, because the language concepts they are
using are entirely consistent with their basic understandings (or map) of the world. Similarly, religious devotees
may use certain premises to explain the world that will be unavailable to an atheist.
IA prompt
30 What role does imagination play in producing knowledge about the world?
• Sometimes our cognitive tools are trustworthy, but sometimes they are misleading. Like any map, our
cognitive processes, when not used reflectively, can lead us astray, even if most of the time they are reliable.
Optical illusions are a clear example of this, as is the fact that the way we describe our sense impressions might be
heavily influenced by the concepts that our language provides. One of my favourite illusions that demonstrates
this point, isn’t really an ‘illusion’ at all, except that our mind makes it so. What is intriguing about the impossible
trident illusion, shown right, is that it is simply lines on a surface, but our mind tries to create out of that design a
three-dimensional object which cannot exist in reality. It is not the image on the page that is the illusion, but your
mind trying to impose an interpretation on it and that interpretation cannot exist. We don’t experience any of this
interpretation – we see the image, our minds try to interpret it as 3D, we do a double take and get confused.
That sense perception and interpretation are so closely related is also brought out by another more obvious point:
none of the oddly shaped lines (the text) on this page have presented themselves as odd; you have seen the lines
and squiggles and immediately understood only the ‘concept’ behind them. The interpretation and the sense-
experience are the same. Only when we visit a new country – the native language of which we do not speak – are
we confronted with a disconnect between the squiggly lines and the meaning. When a native English speaker sees
Hebrew, Japanese, Chinese or Vietnamese, they see only the lines because they do not have the right background
knowledge. But when it comes to English, they will not even be aware of the lines; they only see the words and
‘see’ their meaning.
The point here is that while we might be experiencing the world through these cognitive processes, they are
experienced through the lens of our interpretations and background beliefs. If we are not careful, those
interpretations might lead us into the dangerous territory of mistaken interpretation or outright prejudice.
Learner profile
Open-minded
How can I remain open to the fact that my own views might not be fully reliable?
Memory and language can be quite faulty for an individual in developing knowledge, but the real question is how
does the community of historians overcome this or take this into consideration when developing historical
knowledge that often uses first person testimony of events as evidence? Each AOK brings with it a ‘method’
which will be discussed in the following chapters and the point of these methods is to take advantage of the
strengths of these cognitive tools and manage the weaknesses of them in relation to the scope of that community.
• Simply discussing the tools is not an adequate Theory of Knowledge analysis. The sum of this discussion is a
relatively straightforward but crucial point in relation to an effective and successful TOK experience. Simply
outlining the weaknesses of the cognitive tools for individuals isn’t yet a full analysis of knowledge. A successful
TOK analysis will consider how those weaknesses relate to the construction of knowledge, whether it be at the
individual level (‘Should I trust my memory?’ or ‘How does my imagination help me understand the knowledge
of others?’), or the shared level of the community (‘What role does intuition play in the construction of
mathematical knowledge?’ or ‘How does technology influence the reliability of our political knowledge?’ or
‘How does the scientific method protect against the unconscious bias of individual scientists?’).
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Ethics
CASE STUDY
Mapping an ethical dilemma
In the year 2000, a couple from Malta (an island in the Mediterranean Sea) travelled to Manchester in
the United Kingdom. The wife was pregnant with conjoined twins and, knowing that it would be a very
difficult birth and that the babies would need intensive care, the UK had invited the couple to St Mary’s
Hospital in order to look after the mother and babies. The babies were born in August, but one of the
twins, Mary, was very sick and her heart and lungs stopped working immediately after birth. Being
conjoined, this meant that the other baby, Jodie, provided blood and oxygen for both of them.
Unfortunately, this placed a huge burden on Jodie’s heart and lungs and the doctors did not expect Jodie
to survive for long as she was doing so much work for both twins.
The doctors wanted to separate the twins, believing that Jodie had a very good chance of survival,
though they knew that because Mary’s heart and lungs were not functioning, she would not survive any
attempt at separation. The babies’ parents understood the medical facts and the likely outcomes, but did
not consent to the operation, arguing that they could not willingly consent to an operation that would kill
one of their children.
The hospital, believing that it had a duty to protect life where it could, went to the courts to ask
permission to separate the babies. The first court (Crown Court) allowed the separation against the
parents’ wishes, but the parents appealed to the High Court to stop the operation. The High Court also
allowed the operation, but for different reasons. The operation was successfully conducted, Mary died,
and the family returned to Malta with Jodie, who grew up healthily and happily (BBC News).
There are all sorts of ways to explore this example, which is full of ethical and legal dilemmas as well as
deep human tragedy and triumph. One way is to analyse and evaluate the reasons the judges gave for
their decisions to separate the twins and the different approaches they used. These different approaches
can be thought of as different ‘maps’: the reality of the situation was about babies, biology and law, but
the ethical dilemma was hard to describe. The first Crown Court judge, Lord Johnson, described the
situation using the language of ‘life support machines’, arguing that Mary ‘lives only because of her
physical attachment to Jodie. The blood and the oxygen that maintain her life come from Jodie. In the
words of one of the doctors, Jodie is her life support machine’ (A (Children)). Think back to what we said
about maps earlier. Lord Johnson takes the reality and translates it into a different set of circumstances
which provide a method of thinking through the dilemma.
The map Lord Johnson used to think through the situation emphasized Mary and her well-being. He
asked the traditional questions one asks when faced with someone who is on life support and who is not
expected to survive. In those cases, the tools available (the elements of the ‘life support map’) are things
like quality of life and questions such as, ‘is it right to end a life of unending suffering with no hope of
long-term survival?’ Characterizing the situation in this way and using this sort of reasoning led to a
relatively straight forward answer – it was in Mary’s best interests to allow Mary to die and end her
suffering.
The High Court decision, while advocating for the same result, used an entirely different map to navigate
the complexities of the issue. In their decision, one of the judges, Justice Ward suggested that Mary
‘sucks the lifeblood of Jodie and her parasitic living will soon be the cause of Jodie ceasing to live’ (A
ACTIVITY
Consider the two positions offered by the Justices in the case study about the conjoined twins.
1 What are the various strengths of the two maps being applied to the situation?
2 Is one way of understanding the dilemma better than the other? How are you measuring this?
3 What other maps might have been applied to the case? Try to develop a different way of unpacking
the various elements of the dilemma.
4 What is different about your map of the situation from others?
5 What are the different priorities in the various approaches?
6 Are there better and worse approaches to dilemmas like this? How can we decide which are better or
worse?
ACTIVITY
Consider an ethical dilemma.
1 Choose a stance to take on the dilemma and decide which facts pertaining to the case you would
choose in order to develop an argument for your position.
2 Now choose a different position on the case. Are there different facts you would choose to explore in
relation to the dilemma?
3 How can you overcome the challenges of deciding which factors are most relevant?
Different people may disagree fundamentally on what the right facts to consider are in an ethical dilemma, and this
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
will undoubtedly be the result of a whole range of factors. An individual’s religion will have an influence, as will
their background knowledge and which community of knowers they are part of. The parents of the conjoined twins,
being religious, imposed that element onto the situation; the doctors at St Mary’s Hospital had a particular skill set,
so naturally thought of the dilemma in terms of what their medical abilities could do in the situation to make things
better. The judges chose different maps again: given that their task was to decide, they needed to look to models that
were helpful for decision making and applied maps which have been helpful in the past. Whether to withdraw
someone from life support or to protect someone from a threat are situations for which answers, and methods to find
answers, have already been developed. Finding similarities with the case of the conjoined twins and applying these
models provided clear methods to find answers in this case too.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
If moral claims conflict, does it follow that all views are equally acceptable?
The reasons why you’ve been encouraged to consider who your puppet masters are or which communities of
knowers you belong to is another way of exploring what tools you can use to explore challenging ethical dilemmas
such as those described above.
DEEPER THINKING
Ethics, objectivity and reason
Does this discussion about the challenges we face in identifying relevant facts to use in our exploration
of ethical dilemmas mean that there can be no agreement on what those facts are? Does this mean, in
other words, that ethical principles are purely relative or that there are not ‘objective’ relative principles?
The answer to this question depends on a number of factors. Just because there may be some
disagreement over which map, or which ethical principles we should use, to help us make ethical
decisions, does not mean that there are not better or worse maps and principles. Making this distinction,
however, requires debate and argument and this is not simply a process of emotions. This debate
requires logic, reason, justification and evidence. Agreement in this sort of inquiry is possible, but it might
take time, critical reflection, debate and compromise to arrive at it. This, interestingly, is the same in any
community of knowers or AOK.
Another important point is that our question about the relativity of ethical principles is a question we’ve
arrived at through an analysis of how ethical dilemmas work. We have not assumed that ethical
questions are inherently relative from the outset. Too often, TOK students, when thinking about ethical
dilemmas, assume from the beginning that ethics is entirely relative in a way that other questions like
science or mathematics is not. There might be some truth in this position, but it is a position that should
never be blindly assumed and applied.
Individual knowers hold an incredible amount of power in relation to the community of which they are a part. The
knowledge of a community is in a constant state of flux: our understanding of the world changes with new evidence
and new experiences; new beliefs and theories replace older ones; individuals add to existing ‘bodies of knowledge’.
Individual knowers play a central role in this process in that individuals are the ones having the new experiences,
finding the new evidence and developing the new theories and beliefs based on them. Our history books are full of
stories of these individuals who happened to be in the right place at the right time to see what needed to be seen, or
to offer a new interpretation, which shifts the established view of how we see things. Who knows? You might be
one of these people who are in the right place at the right time and with the right knowledge and skills to see
something new in the world.
If the knowledge we have about the world is indeed shifting and changing all the time, then what responsibility does
that confer upon the individual? If individuals didn’t question, challenge or test what is ‘accepted’ by the
community, then knowledge would never change. In the western world, we would not have effective medicines if
individuals didn’t test the medieval views of the ‘humours’ (the idea that the human body consisted of four different
types of liquids, which, in different ratios, would produce our outward ‘health’) and challenged the view that
‘bleeding’ sick patients would make them better.
IA prompt
30 What role does imagination play in producing knowledge about the world?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
In what ways do ethical judgments differ from other kinds of judgments?
In 2018, the internet was flooded with praise for a Malian refugee living in Paris, who, without any sense of worry
for his own safety, scaled four flights of balconies to save a four-year-old child (France 24). The child had managed
to climb out over the railing of his apartment’s balcony and was hanging four stories over the street. The man,
Mamoudou Gassama, did not spend any time thinking about what was ‘right’ or ‘good’. He simply saw a situation
that demanded his action and he acted to save the child.
Suppose, however, like in the case of the conjoined twins, we do have the time to consider what is right. After
weighing up and applying different theories, how do we decide that we’ve stumbled across the ‘right’ theory?
Suppose we conclude that the continued use of relatively cheap coal power in a developing country provides
financial benefits to its people that outweighs damage to the environment. Another person, however, disagrees with
this view, suggesting that long-term damage to the planet leaves everyone worse off. We might agree with them on
those facts, but we might seriously disagree with them on just what those facts amount to in terms of what we should
do. Ethical theories are how we link facts to what should be done, but accepting which theory best captures that
relationship might have more to do with what we already want.
David Hume, an eighteenth-century Scottish philosopher suggested something like this when he argued that reason
(constructing and applying ethical theory) cannot tell us how to act – any decision to act is motivated by some desire
or ‘passion’ already motivating us. The suggestion is that we fish around for a theory until we find one that we can
use to defend a course of action that we already want.
These cases raise the question about the point of ethical theory. If we are already prepared to act in many cases, and
if in others we only accept a theory as providing the ‘correct’ ethical outcome if it supports what we already believe,
then perhaps this type of knowledge is useless. This, however, goes too far. We generally agree with the philosopher
Immanuel Kant that emotions and desires are not very good as sources of behaviour. In the moment when we’re
unable to think through issues, emotions and desires may be useful tools to use, but in our more reflective moments
we have the opportunity to choose how we want to be. What sort of actions would we want to commit? What sorts
of people do we want to be? This is the role of ethical theory. We develop ethical principles so we can, when we are
free of the immediate needs of the moment, test ideas and make decisions about how we would want to respond to a
situation. Use the QR code in the margin to read an ‘Introduction to Ethical Theory’, which contains information
about different approaches to ethical considerations.
Learner profile
Principled
What role do our own moral principles play in knowing about and acting in the world?
ACTIVITY
Identify a significant ethical dilemma facing your community or the world today. Try to identify the types
of beliefs at work in the various perspectives on the dilemma being taken.
1 Try to categorize them in terms of ‘personal knowledge’, that is, the types of knowledge and
experiences that are unique to individuals. This might include the experiences that individuals have
had, their culture, religion, economic position or other general political beliefs. It might also include
relevant procedural knowledge that they have.
2 Then try to identify the relevant ‘shared knowledge’, that is, those beliefs they have that have been
developed by some community of knowers. This might include their understanding of the relevant
historical or scientific facts, or other propositional knowledge relevant to the case.
3 Now imagine that you wanted to develop a debate between these perspectives. How would you
engage the various categories of knowledge? Would knowing different facts about the situation lead to
a different perspective? Would providing different types of experiences lead to a shift in perspective?
In cases such as these, ethical theory can provide a framework to explore the impact of those different
perspectives and experiences.
The elements you identified in the activity might fit into different theories in different ways, but they will
nevertheless help you think through the various perspectives and choices that are available in the debate. While it is
not clear what is the right answer to many of the ethical dilemmas we face as individuals, it nevertheless is true that
ethical theory gives us the opportunity to provide justification and support for our beliefs. More importantly, it will
help us train our responses to situations in a way that we can exercise choice and purpose in our behaviour.
Learner profile
Risk-takers
What risks are involved in using new forms of technology to create knowledge?
Look around. Are you surrounded by ‘technology’? Have you ever been without ‘technology’? At the beginning of
Chapter 2, we asked you to look around and consider the different objects in the world and consider the knowledge
that went into making them. Objects themselves are not knowledge, but without some pre-existing knowing, these
objects could not have been created.
In this chapter we will consider the first of the course’s optional themes and ask about the nature and role of
technology in the construction, management and dissemination of knowledge. But we must first think a bit about
what we think technology is. Rather than racing off to a dictionary, we’ve asked you to uncover some intuitions by
imagining a world without technology. What does the landscape look like? What are people doing in this world?
ACTIVITY
Take a moment to consider with a partner just what a world without technology would look like.
1 What would be missing?
2 hat would have to be added to the world to take the place of technology?
3 How are people living?
4 How are they communicating?
Now narrow your imagining to the question of technology in the context of constructing knowledge:
5 What would it be like for scientists if there was no technology available?
6 Could an artist construct knowledge?
7 Would an expert historian be able to develop the types of historical claims that you’re used to?
8 How much mathematical knowledge would be available if there was no technology?
Learner profile
Risk-takers
How comfortable would you be living without your technology?
TOK trap
What are dictionaries? One answer to this can be found by considering the updates to the Oxford
English Dictionary (OED), the online version of which is updated quarterly. In June 2019, 1400 new
words were added, including bae and yeesh (‘Updates to the OED’). Why does it need ‘updating’? The
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
OED, like any dictionary, captures the meaning of a term, rather than officially creating the definition. In
other words, the words are already commonly in use before a dictionary then adds them. In this case,
people were already using the term ‘bae’, the people at the OED noticed this, and once the term was
common enough, they added it to the dictionary. Furthermore, sometimes the usage of terms will shift
and change over time. Consider the term ‘wicked’. It used to describe something morally bad or evil, but
has now, in American English, also come to mean something excellent, or as an ‘adverb intensifier’
synonymous with ‘extremely’.
What this means is that a ‘dictionary definition’ should never be considered the final form of a set-in-
stone definition, especially in TOK, where the whole point of the course is to critically reflect on the
sources of our knowledge. By appealing to a dictionary to say that ‘this is the only way to use this term’,
you are limiting how knowledge works. Dictionaries only indicate common usage of a term, so by limiting
your use of a word only to that means you might miss out on a term’s nuances.
It is almost always a bad idea to use dictionary definitions in your TOK work unless you are going to
challenge the definition. You might do this by suggesting that a definition is limiting (thereby exploring
the limitations of language, or the role of culture in shaping our knowledge). Of course, you can use a
dictionary in your thinking (sometimes you have to if you don’t know what a word means), but these
definitions do not always need to be part of your final product (such as in-class essays or presentations,
the Essay on a prescribed title or TOK exhibition). Including a definition in an essay is a choice, not an
obligation.
In the case of the ‘definition’ of technology, for example, rather than running to a dictionary we have
modelled a way of coming to an understanding of the term, rather than simply swallowing a definition
imposed by someone else. This shows critical thinking.
In the world without technology you imagined, computers and smartphones were probably missing. Imagine a world
where mothers and fathers are no longer badgering young people to ‘get off your computer!’ or teachers are not
confiscating your phones until the end of the day. Cars, airplanes and household appliances were probably missing
too. Surely anything requiring electricity was absent. What about houses – were there any types of shelter in your
world? Are people reading books in your technologically empty world? Are people only writing letters to one
another? What are they using to write?
Our first assumptions of just what ‘technology’ refers to might be limited to thinking about machines and computers
and smartphones, or things that eat up electricity. However, we might also consider technology more broadly,
especially when we think of it in relation to Theory of Knowledge. It is obvious to say that the vast majority of
objects we interact with every day are not ‘natural’ objects, in the sense that mother nature didn’t create them. Rocks
and bushes are ‘natural’ in this sense, but roads and ball-point pens are not. This is an obvious point but one which
might help us unpack what we mean by ‘technology’. Did the technology-less world you imagined include roads?
Books? Pencils? These are certainly not ‘natural’, but would we want to include them under the category of
‘technology’ and what effect would this have on our thinking about knowledge more generally?
Think back to the introduction to Chapter 2 when we considered the types of objects for which some sort of
knowledge was required to exist. Clearly this applies to computers and smartphones, but it could also apply to things
like microscopes. Think of the technological know-how required to create the lenses, or the slide plates, or the
housing of the lenses or the stand. Even the simplest magnifying glass requires an impressive amount of skill and
ability to construct. Microscopes, then, should be thought of as a form of technology. It is an object which a lot of
technological know-how was required to create. We’d happily accept a scanning electron microscope as technology
(not least because we have to plug it in to get it to work!), but perhaps the simple microscope you used in your
middle school science class isn’t as obviously considered ‘technology’. It should be.
Beyond just the knowledge required to create the object, however, think of how the purpose of an object fits within
a purpose or goal. We might consider a house or a shelter to be a sort of tool by which we live more safe and healthy
lives. It took a lot of technological know-how to build it, but the reasons we built it are relevant to its status as
technology: it serves a wider purpose and its creation was an attempt to meet that purpose. If someone needs to be
protected from the elements and have a safe place to sleep and store their stuff, they will build this object (the house
or shelter) to perform that function.
Thinking of technology as being linked to the practical actions involved in making knowledge, then,
allows us to think of experts in the AOKs as a bit like craftspeople. As ‘experts’ in these communities of
knowers, they have the required understanding of the nature of the subject and an understanding of
what truths have been developed in the subject, the rules related to the construction of further
knowledge, and the practical knowledge required to apply those rules in the actual construction of further
knowledge. Students, then, are like apprentices into these communities who are learning the craft of
knowledge construction (an idea we discussed briefly in Chapter 2). This is necessary, as part of this
process is the ability to understand and use the relevant technology in that field.
With this new sense of technology as being, roughly, a tool created for a purpose, we might now narrow down this
purpose to knowledge-related activities. These activities might include the creation, preservation, dissemination and
communication of knowledge. With this in mind, we might now consider things like books, pens, paper, email,
social media, online databases, telescopes, the Large Hadron Collider or the internet as a whole, as being types of
technology which we can discuss under the broad heading of ‘knowledge and technology’.
This chapter, then, is an attempt to do just this: explore the impact of technology on knowledge and reflect on that
impact. The role it has played in the development of knowledge cannot be understated: one could argue that
technology has created the conditions under which any knowledge could be developed or constructed. However,
there have always been deep questions about the impact of the technological tools we use to construct knowledge:
• Does the use of books to record knowledge unfairly limit knowledge only to those who know how to read?
• Does the fact that the technologies used in science have a pre-set expectation about the sort of information to be
measured mean that other information is lost or ignored or not recognized?
More recently, we have found that access to information (particularly in the construction of our political beliefs) has
grown exponentially, but with unfettered access to knowledge provided by the internet we lose the ability to filter
out false claims. Anyone now has the ability to disseminate their own understanding of the world. We are
bombarded with claims and might struggle to weed out those not worth listening to. At the same time, however, we
find ourselves at the whim of the people who manage the internet platforms; they have a lot of control over the
content we see, or the content that is recommended to us.
IA prompt
23 How important are material tools in the production or acquisition of knowledge?
One thing we will not be doing much of in this chapter is talking about technology in terms of knowledge about
technology. Rather we’ll always be focused on how technology affects how we develop knowledge, store
knowledge, provide knowledge and how we (as apprentices or students) inherit knowledge from experts.
Data
Data refers to basic observations and facts in the world, or at least a representation of those facts. In neurobiology,
for example, we might count the number of synapses in a section of the brain and those numbers might become the
data representing the synapses. By counting and finding a number, we have represented a fact in the world. We
might then gather more data by counting the number of synapses in the brains of people of different ages. All those
numbers representing the synapses are the data.
ACTIVITY
After you have completed this activity you can check your answers by using the QR code. State whether
each of the examples below represents data or information. Give reasons, using your understanding of
the differences between data and information.
The challenge, then, is to remain reflective when applying various frameworks. Which framework is better: one
which considers the information about the ice caps as part of a natural process, or one which sees it as a
consequence of human behaviour? Once you start asking these questions (about which frameworks are more
reliable), then you start doing the genuinely important work in Theory of Knowledge. Considering the different
frameworks and the different communities of knowers which use them can help enrich a discussion or debate
beyond simply disagreeing and argument.
ACTIVITY
Use the QR code to visit the ‘Vital Signs’ website at NASA. Review the following sub-pages:
• Evidence
• Causes
• Effects
• Scientific Consensus
• Vital Signs.
See if you can apply this discussion of data, information and knowledge by identifying discrete elements
where each is being presented. Can you explain what makes it ‘data’ as opposed to ‘information’? What
is it about the presentation that suggests that ‘knowledge’ is being presented as opposed to
‘information’?
ACTIVITY
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
1 Copy the table below and complete it to indicate what you think would constitute data, information and
knowledge in the areas of knowledge shown.
2 Review the cognitive tools we looked at in Chapter 2 (pages 69–71). What effect do they have on the
collection of data, the processing of information and the construction of knowledge?
3 In what ways might the conventions and fundamental values of different communities of knowers (not
just AOK communities, but also religious, political or other social communities) influence the gathering
and collection of data, the processing of information and the construction of knowledge?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
In what sense, if any, can a machine be said to know something?
AI refers to systems, generally computerized systems, which are designed to solve problems by taking data in,
processing it and providing an outcome for its users. Examples include:
• speech and face recognition
• analysing large amounts of data and finding patterns
• monitoring external systems (like road conditions)
• adjusting how a machine responds to changing conditions (by altering how much power is transferred to the
wheels of a car, for example)
• learning (often called ‘machine learning’).
The machines perform these functions through the use of clever programming and complex algorithms. These
systems all solve problems: we pose a question, build a machine to take in information from the world, process that
data and deliver a response. Many of these systems certainly appear intelligent, especially given that they might do
things more quickly and with fewer errors than a human could ever do.
There are different types of artificial intelligence, however. Weak AI is a form of computer functioning which
largely relies on the programming it has been provided with. Any output by a weak AI system is relatively
predictable and explainable by the rules put into it. The types of intelligence in the list above are largely thought of
as weak AI because the possible range of results of the analyses will already have been coded into the machines.
However, researchers are working on developing systems whose programming will enable them to deliver results
which we might not be able to predict, even if we know all the programming put into them. This is called strong AI,
because it is much more like the type of intelligence associated with human beings. If you ask your friend to pick up
a drink from the store, you can largely predict what your friend will say (‘yes’, hopefully), but your friend might do
any number of things that are relevant but unpredictable. They might shrug. They might nod or shake their head.
They might say nothing or sigh dejectedly. They are certainly processing your request and behaving in a relevant
way, but you couldn’t have predicted their behaviour. So far, computers have yet to achieve what we would call
‘strong AI’: while computers might surprise us in all sorts of ways (consider the surprising capabilities of Google
Translate. More on this later), we wouldn’t say that they are doing things we couldn’t have predicted from their
programming. Some researchers suggest that genuine strong AI is still a few decades away, but the possibility of it
arriving within your lifetime is real (Frankenfield). Strong AI would show intellectual capabilities that would appear
to be so like our own that we might feel compelled to say that the system has genuine knowledge.
Learner profile
Thinkers
Are we the only thinkers?
What does it mean, therefore, to know how to play chess? One response would be to say that you know how to play
chess if you know all the rules of the game and are able to understand the game. This is like the epistêmê discussed
earlier. Your knowledge of how to play chess then is the product of a set of other beliefs that you have – beliefs
about the individual pieces, about the board, about how each piece can move. You might, for instance, have heard of
the game without ever having seen a chess board and just learned about it by reading a rule book and seeing some
diagrams with various moves presented. It seems odd though to say that we can know how to play the game without
ever really having played it.
Suppose it wasn’t chess, but instead rugby. We could, presumably, learn all the rules and facts about rugby, but
we’d never suggest we knew how to play unless we had actually given it a try. Rugby is a terrifically physical sport
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
and without actually playing it, there are elements of the game we would miss; without that experience we wouldn’t
really say we knew how to play rugby. This is something we discussed in the last chapter when exploring the
differences between knowing that and knowing how. The opposite is not the case: it seems that being able to play a
game is enough to say that you do have knowledge.
Another response to this question about whether knowledge is something a computer can ‘have’, then, would be to
suggest that knowing how to play chess is being able to play chess. If we want to confirm that someone knows how
to play chess, rather than asking about which beliefs about chess they have, we might instead ask whether they are
able to play it. We will then engage with them across a chess board. It will be obvious to us whether they are able to
play, even though we have no direct experience of their beliefs about or understanding of chess. In other words, we
don’t have any direct access to the way in which they play (their strategy, or how they make decisions about how
they move their pieces), all we can observe is them moving their pieces. If they are moving them in the right way
with some minimal degree of competency, then we’d say they know how to play. If they beat us, then we’d say they
know how to play better than us!
If you were to watch someone trying to play rugby (even though they might have all the relevant beliefs about
rugby), you’d know pretty quickly if they don’t, in fact, know how to play. They might be wandering all over the
pitch trying to catch up and not really knowing how to follow what is a very quick game.
So, if we only need to see someone play chess in order to feel satisfied that they know how to play chess, what about
the chess program on our computer or on our phone? If we lose to it and we know how to play chess, then it seems
fair to suggest, or at least consider that the computer ‘knows’ how to play chess. It may be that we’re pretty easy to
beat in chess, but what if a computer defeats a Grandmaster of chess? This is precisely what happened in the spring
of 1997, when reigning world champion Garry Kasparov, one of the greatest chess players of all time, was defeated
by the ‘Deep Blue’ supercomputer built by IBM (Levy). This would seem, then, to be a case of computers having
knowledge, or at least the knowledge of how to play chess well.
One worry might be that the way in which we know how to play chess is crucial here. For human beings our ability
(know-how) to play chess requires a whole bunch of beliefs. We know that those beliefs are present in us, because in
our own case we can experience that we have those beliefs. We also experience the relationship between that
background knowledge and our abilities; those beliefs about chess are the cause of our ability to play chess. In the
computer’s case, however, we might not want to say that it can have beliefs. We would say instead that ‘it was
programmed’ and therefore doesn’t really understand its actions or that the actions were fixed because of its
programming.
This is a subtle shift of the question, however. Now, instead of wondering about whether or not being able to do
something amounts to ‘having a form of knowledge’, the question has become about whether computers have
knowledge in the same way that humans do. It is clear that they don’t, not least because computers are not human.
We are not wondering if computers can ‘know in the same way humans know’. We’re asking a more challenging
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
question about what ‘knowing’ amounts to and suggesting that having the technical ability to do something is a
reasonable starting point.
IA prompt
1 What counts as knowledge?
Consider the types of questions that have appeared on multiple choice tests you may have taken in school. In many
of these cases it was simply a matter of recall. You might have been asked a question like ‘What is the capital of
France?’ or ‘What is the chemical formula for ammonia?’ The teachers were probably perfectly happy to say that
you had knowledge of the answer provided you could tick the boxes for ‘Paris’ or ‘NH3’ and not ‘Lyon’ or ‘NH2’.
Teaching, if effective, had programmed you to reply in the right way.
Now imagine that you program a computer to respond properly when asked about the world’s capital cities or a
bunch of chemical formulas. If done properly, then wouldn’t this be the same? Who cares how you recalled them?
You and the computer both answered correctly. In fact, a computer system named Aristo recently took an 8th
grade/Year 9 science exam and passed with 90 per cent! It also achieved 80 per cent on a 12th grade /Year 13 exam.
Questions were multiple choice, so some were memory recall questions, but there were also more challenging
questions requiring logic, such as the following:
Which change would most likely cause a decrease in the number of squirrels living in an area?
(1) a decrease in the number of predators
(2) a decrease in competition between the squirrels
(3) an increase in available food
(4) an increase in the number of forest fires (Metz)
If your science teacher is satisfied with your knowledge when we select (4), then wouldn’t they also be satisfied
with the computer’s ‘knowledge’ if it selected it too?
Another point related to whether or not computers can have knowledge has to do with claims like ‘computers cannot
come up with new knowledge’. Critics might suggest that while computers might ‘know’ the chemical formula of
ammonia, they certainly couldn’t construct or design a scientific experiment. This might be true, but the principle
here seems to be that computers can only know if they can know to the same extent as an expert, or be able to do
what an expert can do. You might have very little knowledge of how to design or conduct higher level physics
experiments, but it would seem unfair to say that you therefore cannot have knowledge in physics. You clearly do
have some knowledge of physics, but you certainly don’t have all the knowledge that experts in the field do. So why
would we expect a computer to have all the knowledge in a field before we grant that it can have knowledge?
CASE STUDY
AlphaGo
In 2016, a computer program called ‘AlphaGo’ beat Lee Sedol, one of the best ‘Go’ players in the world
in a convincing 4–1 match. (Go is a board game that originated more than 3000 years ago and involves
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
multiple strategies, making it more complex than chess (DeepMind).)
DeepMind, the company behind AlphaGo, went on to develop another program called AlphaGo Zero,
which has also become an expert in Go. However, rather than following specific rules programmed into
it, and without developing strategies based on knowing the final objective of the game or studying
thousands of other games of Go (which is how AlphaGo perfected its abilities), AlphaGo Zero developed
its own strategies through a process called ‘self-play’. In self-play, a program knows only the most basic
rules of a game and does not yet know what is the best strategy for that game. AlphaGo Zero was given
the rules of the game, then played 4.9 million games over three days against itself and developed
strategies and skills surpassing AlphaGo’s abilities (AlphaGo developed its strategies over many months
of evaluating other games played by expert Go players). The next iteration of the program, simply called
Alpha Zero, learned the strategies necessary to beat AlphaGo Zero after only 24 hours of self-play.
The point here is that these programs developed their own strategies. The information programmed into
them was kept to a minimum (just the basic rules of the game) and they then worked out for themselves
what was needed to become experts.
CASE STUDY
Google Translate
In 2016, Google Translate announced an interesting example of what might be called ‘learning’.
Engineers at Google programmed the Translate software to translate between Korean and English and
Japanese and English, using a new process which considers the sentences rather than merely the
words in those sentences. What surprised them, however, was that without being programmed to do so,
the Translate program could manage translations between Korean and Japanese (Coldewey). There is
some debate about what this amounts to, but it nevertheless suggests that, in some cases, programs
are able to develop skills and abilities that are surprising to us (Gedalyah).
What, then, are we to make of this discussion about knowledge and computers? Were you to discuss this in the
context of a class or assessment, you should not treat it as if it were a question about computers. What you want to
ask, as we did at the start of this discussion, is ‘What is knowledge?’ or ‘What is knowing?’ in order to see whether
that can be applied to non-human technological systems. We’ve offered a short argument here to suggest that it is at
least not obvious that knowledge cannot be applied to computers.
One thing we might conclude from this discussion is that it makes sense that computers store information and that
this might legitimately be called a form of knowing. We store all sorts of information in our ‘minds’ or brains about
all sorts of things. We store memories and facts and we can be said to know them, even when we are not thinking
about them. For example, we know what the capital of France is even when we are not thinking about it. One thing
technology provides us, then, is a way of storing information such as this. Dictionaries, encyclopedias and the pages
ACTIVITY
How do you access the internet? Do you use your smartphone? Your computer at home? The
computers at school?
1 Make a list of all the ‘access points’ that you can take advantage of to access the internet. Copy and
complete the table to identify why each access point is available to you, as well as what might make
that access point unavailable to you.
Ways in which you Why are you able to take What might limit your access
access the internet advantage of that access point? to that access point?
School computers I am enrolled in this school My school might not be able to
afford to buy computers
My family might not be able to
afford to send me to school
2 Review your list and consider all the ways in which the availability of the internet might be limited by
people, institutions or circumstances beyond your control.
3 What effect would this have on your status as a ‘knower’? What communities of knowledge would still
be available to you? What communities of knowers would you lose access to? How would this affect
your ability to construct knowledge?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How might technology exacerbate or mitigate unequal access, and divides in our access, to knowledge?
Hopefully, this activity and the discussion it created will show that not everyone has equal access to the internet.
Access to the internet requires access to sophisticated computers and WiFi/data infrastructure and, given that so
much of the world’s commerce and communication takes place on the internet, it is becoming increasingly difficult
to engage with the world without it.
Access to knowledge has always been a problem. Historically, access to knowledge has been limited to those who
have the wealth necessary to attend school, buy resources and take time away from earning money to devote to
learning. People generally needed to be literate and have the political freedom to participate in the activities around
knowledge construction and dissemination. This sort of access, however, has often been limited to those who had
enough wealth to engage, or were part of the power majority, meaning those in the minority have had less access.
There is no reason to think that the internet isn’t also affected by these issues.
Article 27 of the UN’s Declaration of Human Rights says that ‘everyone has the right freely to participate in the
cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits’ (‘Universal
Declaration of Human Rights’). Increasingly, the types of knowledge and knowing offered in culture, arts and
scientific advancement are played out on the internet, and the UN ‘underscores the unique and transformative nature
of the internet not only to enable individuals to exercise their right to freedom of opinion and expression, but also a
range of other human rights, and to promote the progress of society as a whole’, meaning that all states should
prioritize ‘universal access’ to the internet (LaRue). Some even argue that access to the internet has become a
human right (Edwards).
There are many examples from all over the world of how individuals’ access to the internet is limited. Sometimes it
is through the limitations imposed by companies who charge for access and sometimes it is limited by political
bodies and their attempt to only allow access to certain websites, with censorship of the information provided on
those websites. This highlights how financial and political dynamics affect the dissemination of knowledge, which,
sadly is not new.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do social networks reinforce our existing perspective rather than boost our engagement with diverse
perspectives?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can algorithms be biased?
Perhaps, you say, this is just a reflection of the actual use of the word so is a reasonable translation. However, the
social context in which the word ‘nurse’ became identified as a feminine role is itself the result of deeply embedded
social dynamics which are today considered prejudiced. The problem is more sinister in the case of ‘engineer’.
Women have traditionally found it a challenge to break into a number of professions, like engineering. Developing
algorithms which don’t take these social dynamics into consideration could be seen to propagate unconscious biases
and prejudices. Sexist assumptions are made clear in the example of ‘the table’ being translated as ‘die Tabelle’. The
reason why is because of the word ‘soft’, which has been given a feminine interpretation. The algorithm associates
‘soft’ with women, so finds the feminine noun die Tabelle and uses it, although this destroys the original meaning of
the English phrase.
How does this bias occur? We wouldn’t suggest that the machines themselves are prejudiced or discriminatory; in
fact, one of the reasons why we have hope in technology and computers is so we might become less prejudiced as a
society. The problem, of course, is that the values and biases already in the human population get encoded into the
programs and technology that we create.
Indeed, instances such as these aren’t isolated to the web. The development of photographic film processing by
companies like Kodak, for instance, was historically calibrated towards lighter coloured skin tones, which meant
that special filters and processing was needed when photographing people with darker coloured skin (Lewis 2019).
This underscores how a social bias (valuing lighter skin over darker skin) can be encoded into a piece of technology
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
(film-processing).
Assessment advice
When considering what sorts of objects to consider when completing your TOK exhibition, you want to
be thinking about the beliefs and ideas behind the object. The ‘Shirley Card’ might be one example. Here
we see objects which illustrate the way in which social values and prejudices might impact technology
and vice versa.
Kodak, a photographic company in the United States, calibrated their film development process towards
whiter skin tones. Kodak produced a ‘colour guide’ with its film processing machines so technicians
could test whether they had developed the film properly. However, only women with light skin tones were
on the card. This translated into technical difficulties for photographers when trying to photograph people
with darker skin and often required different processing techniques or required the use of coloured filters
on the camera’s lens. It wasn’t until 1996 that the company provided cards showing a more diverse
range of skin tones. Use the QR code on the right to read an article about Kodak’s Shirley Cards.
The non-conscious value embedded in this process was that having darker skin was something outside
the norm. As society changed, so did the film development process: in 1996 a new version of the colour
testing cards were included with the colour guide, showing a wider diversity of skin tones (Ollinger).
IA prompt
21 What is the relationship between knowledge and culture?
IA prompt
35 In what ways do values affect the production of knowledge?
ACTIVITY
1 Carry out some research into the data that different organizations hold about you. Does anything
surprise you? Why is this data so valuable?
CASE STUDY
Sentenced by software
In 2013, Eric Loomis was convicted of running away from police and unlawfully driving a car. When
sentencing him, the judge used information derived from a computer program which analysed data about
people like Loomis, including data about age at first arrest, prior arrest history, employment status,
community ties, substance abuse, criminal associates, educational status and residential stability
(Kowalkiewicz). The analysis showed that people like Loomis tended to reoffend, and so the judge gave
Loomis a longer sentence.
ACTIVITY
1 Could the judge be said to know that Loomis would reoffend, given that the data suggested people in
similar positions tended to do so?
2 Couldn’t Loomis have been in the population of people with all the same data points, but who didn’t
reoffend?
3 Was it fair for the knowledge related to others to be applied to him?
4 In what ways does your school conduct testing that compares your individual results with the results of
other students like you? What decisions does your school make based on that comparison?
The use of big data analysis is also used to help colleges and universities make admissions decisions, where they use
information about an applicant’s internet use, email open rates and social media engagement. Again, these
institutions develop a personal profile of an individual then compare that profile to the data about people with
similar profiles, to see what those students did (for instance, did they accept the place the university offered? Did
they stay enrolled and get their degree? Did they do well?) and then decide whether to accept them (Legatt).
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is big data creating a new cognitive paradigm?
Because so much of our life involves engaging with technology, we can hardly do anything without creating more
data. Even wandering around with a smartphone can create data about where that phone has been. The more big data
collected on people like us, the more others might be able to ‘know’ what we are like and what we are likely to do in
the future. Is it possible that information about us gathered from big data is more reliable than what we ourselves say
about ourselves?
The advent of ‘big data’ and the power it offers provides companies and whoever can access the data to analyse it
with an entirely new viewpoint or perspective in the world. The information and correlations being uncovered by
‘crunching the data’ will undoubtedly affect us more and more as increasing amounts of data about us, and everyone
around us, is collected and used to provide predictions about how we behave.
The internet is a hugely beneficial tool in modern knowledge; we are able to both publish our own knowledge and
are able to find the world’s knowledge in a second. We can directly engage with the ideas from anyone around the
world and push our own knowledge to everyone on the planet. No longer do we have to rely on experts to
disseminate their knowledge through universities or print publications, where our access was filtered and controlled.
This democratizing effect on knowledge (creating a space where everyone, in theory, has direct access to
knowledge), has been as revolutionizing an effect on what and how we know in the modern world as Gutenberg’s
printing press was in the Renaissance and the Age of Enlightenment.
However, there are major tensions when considering just how free our access to this knowledge actually is. On the
one hand, our ability to get to the knowledge is massively fixed on a very low number of access points. Since 2010,
Google has enjoyed a 90 per cent market share for search engines and 63 per cent of the sites on Google are from the
USA (Gordon). While not every use of the internet starts with Google, just think of the last time you typed an
internet address into the URL bar of your browser; how often do you instead type a couple of keywords into Google,
find your site and then head off into the internet? It is also likely that those sites were heavily influenced by only one
of the world’s cultures: the USA. The algorithms for the search engine of this one company are massively influential
in our internet experience. Furthermore, companies spend much time gaming the system so that their company is
shown at the top of internet searches. These facts alone are good reasons to challenge the idea that the internet is a
step towards anything like free and unfettered access to the world’s knowledge.
ACTIVITY
Use the QR code to research how electron microscopes work. They are fundamentally different from the
optical based microscopes that you’re used to from your science labs.
1 Would you say that the electron microscope provides genuine ‘observations’ of the sort that is
prioritized by the scientific method? (See Chapter 9 to learn more about the scientific method.)
2 What other technologies were needed to develop the electron microscope?
3 Do the environments required for the electron microscope to work (like the specimen being in a
vacuum) change the nature of what is being observed?
4 Do you think that the difference in how traditional microscopes and electron microscopes function
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do the tools that we use shape the knowledge that we produce?
DEEPER THINKING
Data and technology
Does it make sense to call what we learn from highly technical machines, used to create new
observations, ‘data’? We differentiated between ‘data’ and ‘information’ earlier, suggesting that
information was a processed form of the data. The output of an electron microscope has been
processed through the use of computers and all sorts of complex technology, translating the input into a
visual representation, so how can this be ‘unprocessed’ data? The many decisions about what and how
to create these machines might suggest that there are other sorts of data that the machines are simply
not calibrated to ‘see’, in which case we are not getting all the data. For example, electron microscopes
use electron beams, so only can capture what the electrons can interact with. We are only getting the
data that it is possible to get with the machine we have created.
Does this influence what you think of the status of these machines as producing useable information
upon which to build knowledge?
ACTIVITY
1 With all the knowledge, information and ideas that are now stored digitally on computers and on the
internet, does this mean that the overall value of knowledge or information is less?
2 What processes do we have to guarantee that the knowledge that we ‘take in’ is reliable?
3 How effective do you think a class like this Theory of Knowledge course is at helping knowers make
decisions about what they should accept as ‘knowledge’?
Learner profile
Communicators
How has technology changed the way we communicate our knowledge to others?
In the middle of the fifteenth century, Johannes Gutenberg built on the existing technology of the printing press
(where inked plates – often woodcuts – would be pressed onto paper, transmitting an image or words onto the paper)
to develop a movable type press. Now, rather than an expensive and unchangeable wood cut, printers could use
individual letters over and over again to print any sort of document. Clay movable type had been invented by earlier
Korean printers, but it broke easily during use. Gutenberg’s use of lead type was the industry norm well into the
nineteenth century.
Given more recent advances, we might think that the importance of Gutenberg’s printing press is limited, but its
importance cannot be overstated. After Gutenberg, the actual process of storing an idea, in writing, on a page was
quick and far cheaper and as the number of books grew, so too did the number of ideas and the ‘amount’ of
knowledge. Gutenberg’s invention meant books could more easily be created, thereby storing and transmitting the
knowledge previously stored in handwritten and hugely expensive manuscripts. The proliferation of books available
after Gutenberg saw literacy rates begin to rise (previously the manuscripts were largely only written by and read by
the educated clergy and the extremely wealthy). The knowledge transmitted created the conditions under which the
European Renaissance and the Enlightenment could take hold. These periods saw a huge growth in knowledge and
culture (and not only in Europe), resulting in the modern world we see today.
The invention of the internet during the twentieth century, however, has seen a revolution in knowledge storage and
transmission which outstrips even Gutenberg’s printing press. It was 1965 when the first two computers
communicated through the technology later used in the internet (Zimmerman and Emspak). Within 32 years, only
about 2 per cent of the people on the planet were internet users. That number grew to 22 per cent in the 10 years
after that. During that same 10-year period, the percentage grew from 11 per cent to 62 per cent in developed
countries. In terms of how much data is now stored on the internet, we enter a world of numbers that we can’t really
understand. In 2014, it was estimated that there were 1024 bytes on the internet, which is about a million ‘exabytes’,
where one exabyte is a billion billion bytes (Pappas). As of September 2019, it is estimated that there are 65 billion
web pages indexed by Google (‘The size of the World Wide Web (The Internet)’), which translates into about 1.7
billion discrete websites (‘Total number of Websites’ 2019).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How does technology extend or transform different modes of human cognition and communication?
We say ‘a culture’ here as if we are living in one culture. This could be seen as insensitive to the great variety of the
world’s cultures, but we say one culture here for a reason. The history of civilizations on our planet seems to be a
story about societies and cultures becoming increasingly integrated and interconnected and uniform as they interact
and share information and knowledge. The data about the numbers of internet users suggest that we have entered a
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Does the fact that so few companies manage the vast amount of knowledge on the internet have a
detrimental effect on the quality of our knowledge?
In what ways might our knowledge be unfairly shaped by these companies?
As knowers, then, the technology of the internet provides individuals with the ability to join nearly any sort of
knowledge community they wish. Individuals can even earn university degrees online, thereby giving themselves
access to those knowledge communities traditionally limited to those with a physical university education. Without
leaving your house you can access knowledge about how to play guitar (even how to make a guitar), or how to
organize a protest. You can access facts and knowledge coming from archaeological digs, find data to help you
analyse economic trends and the very latest knowledge about medical advances.
ACTIVITY
1 Research some of the ethical considerations of automated facial recognition software. Try entering
‘ethics of facial recognition’ into your search engine.
2 Try to construct an ethical principle which you might appeal to, first to justify the use of this software,
then an ethical principle which you might appeal to to challenge the use of the software.
3 In cases where there are conflicting ethical beliefs, how do you think we decide which principle should
take priority? What methods can be used to decide what is the better principle?
Note: Take care not to get caught up in a debate about whether the facial recognition software ‘is
ethical’. You could easily argue both sides of this position. The TOK approach is to explore the
construction of the principles used in such a debate and to explore what happens when various
Now consider if we were to give machines the ability to identify categories of people rather than specific
individuals. Suppose we programmed machines to engage with enemies in a combat situation, in order to save the
lives of real human soldiers. In this case, we would program our machines (robots) to identify enemy soldiers and
engage them. Here again, the robots are already engaged in a morally difficult situation (war and killing), so they are
enacting ethical principles already accepted by society; in this case, something like ‘this war is just and killing
enemies is ethically justified’. You may be uncomfortable with any ethical principles justifying war, but it has been
a commonly ‘accepted’ practice in history. As mentioned in the activity above, whether war can be justified isn’t our
question in TOK. Instead we wonder about the role of ethical principles in the shaping of our knowledge in the
world of technology.
The scenario of robots being engaged in war, however, is an entirely new facet to the age-old practice of war and
requires careful thought. If visual recognition software is being used to allow the robots to identify and engage freely
(without a soldier telling it what to do, as is the case currently with weaponized drones), then all the problems we’ve
already discussed in terms of bias, prejudice and mistakes come into play. In this case, however, people might die,
and civilians might be mistakenly identified as soldiers and end up being targeted. Civilians are often caught up in
battle, sometimes purposefully killed, but, in a real situation with human soldiers, at least there is a real human being
who can be said to be responsible for the mistake. This helps wade through the resulting ethical consequences.
If a robot makes a mistake, who is responsible? Are the software engineers who weren’t even involved in the war to
be held responsible for mistakes a robot running their software made? Are the civilian manufacturers of the robot,
working in factories and laboratories far from the battlefield to blame? What about the commander of the unit who
wasn’t even on the battlefield and who had no direct connection to the choices the robot made? If responsibility for
our consequences is an important part of the construction of our ethical principles, then the use of autonomous
‘killer robots’ seems to raise profoundly difficult questions.
Now consider a rather less dramatic, but no less troublesome example: autonomous cars. They are already on the
road, though at the time of writing we are yet to see fully autonomous cars in widespread use (generally the
autonomous cars of today have a driver who will step in the minute the car makes a bad choice). We cannot write a
program for every event an autonomous car will encounter in real time, so developers must program these cars with
general principles and routines that the car then employs when situations call for it. For example, the car wouldn’t be
programmed to ‘stop at that red light, and that red light and that red light’ for every red light in the city. Rather, it
would be taught to identify any red light and given the general rule ‘stop at any red light you see’ and then we
would let the car get on with the business of finding red lights. The first is a series of particular rules, the latter is a
general or abstract rule. These general rules are what autonomous cars or other machines that must make ‘decisions’
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
are programmed with.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Should we hold people responsible for the applications of technologies they develop/create?
What about the principles the car will employ when faced with a ‘moral’ decision, one that will have significant
consequences for its passengers and others? Suppose, for example, the autonomous car has suffered catastrophic
brake failure and so cannot stop. Suppose now the car is racing towards a busy intersection full of pedestrians. It is
perfectly rational to suppose this sort of thing could occur, so programmers will need to give the car instructions
about what it might do in these situations (especially if there is no ‘safety-driver’ sitting behind the wheel just in
case this happens). Suppose that the car could avoid killing the pedestrians by swerving off the road and into a
barrier, but at the risk of killing the passenger. What if the car simply coasted to a stop, but risked killing the
pedestrians?
ACTIVITY
1 Consider the dilemma above. What would you instruct the car to do in this case? Use the QR code to
read an ‘Introduction to Ethical Theory’ and think about which approach your choice best illustrates.
2 Now consider other ethical dilemmas like the one above, but with different specifics (perhaps there
are more people in the car with the passenger, or perhaps the pedestrians are all parents with their
children). Does the principle you chose in the first instance still seem like the right one to choose
here?
3 What do you think this says about the challenges of developing ethical principles in general? What
challenges for the development of technology do you think this raises?
What this example illustrates is that, like it or not, we cannot leave machines to make these decisions entirely on
their own; they need the general principle programmed into them from the start. But choosing which ethical
principle to give to the machine is not an easy question to answer. How should autonomous cars be programmed to
make decisions in cases where any decision will inevitably lead to the death of others?
In the 1940s, science fiction writer Isaac Asimov offered three laws of robotics which have become something of an
unofficial set of laws governing the programming and development of artificial intelligence (AI). Although Asimov
was a science fiction writer, he wanted to suggest that robots might actually be the sorts of things which wouldn’t
necessarily rise up and kill us all, which was the common impression of robots in the writing of his time. Asimov
suggested the laws as a framework with which we could think of autonomous robots as ‘moral’ beings. His three
laws are:
1 A robot may not injure a human being or, through inaction, allow a human being to come to harm.
2 A robot must obey the orders given it by human beings except where such orders would conflict with the First
Law.
3 A robot must protect its own existence as long as such protection does not conflict with the First or Second Laws
(Salge).
The rise of automated cars offers an interesting test case for these laws, because the scenario we outlined on the
previous page would conflict with rule 1. The car cannot careen through the pedestrian crossing or ditch into a wall
because of rule 1. If the programmers give the car the instructions to protect the passenger in this case, then rule 2 is
broken.
Recognizing that the growth of autonomy in robotics will lead to the need to give them moral principles to follow,
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
the Moral Machine research group at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) is gathering information
about how humans make ethical choices in the hopes that they will then be able to help machines make moral
decisions. The group offers visitors to their website a number of scenarios where an autonomous car is going to
crash but users can make one last-minute decision about the outcome. In the scenarios provided by MIT, for
instance, the imaginary car has suffered sudden brake failure but can take one of two courses of action: does the car
run through the crossing and kill the pedestrians or does the car swerve to avoid them but then kill the driver in the
resulting crash? Do you program the car to always act in a way that minimizes suffering (consequentialism)? Do you
tell the car to protect the driver in all cases (deontology)? Does your thinking change if you consider yourself as one
of the pedestrians? How do you measure the consequences of either action? Are there certain things that the car
should never choose? Use the QR code to read our ‘Introduction to Ethical Theory’ and remind yourself about the
different theories mentioned above.
ACTIVITY
1 Take the MIT Moral Machine quiz using the QR code and see what ethical intuitions you have.
2 What general principles do you think you were using when making the choices you did?
3 Would those general principles be the sorts of things you would want a car to hold?
The ethical dilemmas being considered here are not unique to an autonomous car scenario – they would apply for
any driver, or in any number of ethical situations. What the exercise does emphasize is that it will be necessary to
provide some level of guidance for these cars as they make spur-of-the-moment decisions. Our own moral codes,
then, will be extended into the world of AI. However, the world of autonomous technology raises difficult questions,
largely because they are of an entirely new type of ethical dilemma: beyond knowing what the ‘right’ course of
action would be, we don’t even really know who or what is responsible for that behaviour.
The question posed by the above heading is an excellent ethical question and one which we could look at from a
variety of perspectives. Did we really need to build a bomb after we learned to split the atom and release massive
amounts of explosive energy? Fritz Haber made a name for himself by inventing processes to synthesize ammonia
from nitrogen gas and hydrogen gas, thereby making artificial fertilizer possible, and thereby saving untold numbers
of lives by making food production so much more efficient. But did he really need to then go on to develop
processes to weaponize chlorine gas during the First World War, thereby killing tens of thousands of soldiers? What
about Louis Fieser, who discovered a process to synthesize vitamin K, a blood clotting agent, which helps newborn
babies avoid bleeding to death immediately after birth. Why did he need to go on to work with Dow Chemicals to
produce a better, more effective napalm (the chemical that is used in flame throwers, firebombs and other incendiary
devices)? Fieser didn’t seem to have any ethical concerns about this technology, arguing ‘I have no right to judge
the morality of napalm just because I invented it’ (Neer).
As a question, ‘Should we develop certain types of technology?’ really belongs within the discipline of ethics and
philosophy. The TOK issues here would have to do with how such questions are answered, how the ethical
principles are developed and perhaps the ways in which ethical principles limit the construction of new technologies
or limit the growth of scientific knowledge. In the final analysis, it seems unrealistic to say ‘no’ to a new technology
before it is invented. Perhaps the best we can do is remain reflective in our uses of the new technologies and think
critically about the ethical principles we draw on to guide our use of them.
Learner profile
Communicators
How important is language in communicating and sharing knowledge?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do people from different linguistic or cultural backgrounds live, in some sense, in different worlds?
In Chapter 3, you read about some of the problems that occurred in 2018 when it was noticed that algorithms used to
guide the translation in Google Translate contained some built-in cultural and gender biases. We expect that most
readers of this text will be unable to answer the questions, as they will not speak the language in which the
paragraph containing the answers is written. Did you recognize the language? It is the Nyanja dialect of the Bantu
language Chichewa. If you speak and read Nyanja, or if you know someone who does, what do you make of the
machine-generated translation? Would you say that the machine adequately represented your language, or are there
substantive errors in usage, meaning, or style? We will discuss the problems of translation in detail later in the
chapter.
Here is the paragraph in English:
In trying to understand the relationship between knowledge and language, it might be useful to consider
what life would be – or is – like for people who live or travel somewhere where the language which is
spoken is completely incomprehensible to them. If you can read this paragraph, then it is not providing
you with an example of the kind of experience we are talking about. If you speak Nyanja, an official
language of Malawi and Zimbabwe, then you have no problem knowing what this paragraph says. If you
do not, however, then you are experiencing directly the importance of the relationship between language
and knowledge. If you do not know the language in which the knowledge is transmitted, then you cannot
attain that knowledge.
We began the chapter on language and knowledge with this demonstration because it helps provide an immediate
and striking experience of the importance of language in helping us to gain knowledge.
Quite a large portion of the knowledge that any individual gains is gained through language, either from reading or
from listening. We do make knowledge in other ways – direct observation of events, for example, can provide us
with knowledge about the world around us, but even then, we are likely to process those observations in our
thoughts using words.
ACTIVITY
Probably in doing that activity, you discovered that you could understand what was happening just fine without
words, but that you could not begin to share that knowledge with anyone else without them. If we think a little more
carefully, though, we raise some interesting questions. Probably everything in the video was familiar to you, even
though the objects were not being used for their usual purposes. You probably noticed such items as ping pong balls,
rulers, plastic cups, playing cards, a basketball, chairs, a cup of water, boxes of cereal, books and dominoes, among
others. Try to imagine that you were watching this video without knowing what these objects are and having no
name for any of them. What would that experience be like? Do you think you would understand it as well as you
could when you were able to recognize and name all the objects? If you did not know that all of these objects have
purposes different from what they were used for here (part of the background knowledge that you have associated
with their names), would you have had the same reaction to the cleverness and the effort that went into making this
Rube Goldberg machine? (Rube Goldberg was a cartoonist – an example of his work is shown on the right.)
It might be quite difficult to imagine how you would feel in such a situation, but that question points out one of the
interesting issues related to language and knowledge: the question of whether the language that we know actually
shapes what we can know. This and many other questions will form the basis for our exploration into the nature of
language and knowledge in this chapter.
Semanticity
This feature of language refers to the fact that language is made up of units of meaning, or words. In written
language, words are made up of letters, while in spoken language words are made up of sounds. Another feature of
the semanticity of language is that the words – whether written or spoken – have stable meanings (Hockett 6). A cat
is always a cat; it is never a rat or a hat or a bat, regardless of the fact that all of those words have similar sounds and
similar letters. The English word ‘cat’ has stood for the domestic feline that we are used to since its appearance in
Old English around about the year 700 (‘Cat (n)’). We can count on ‘cat’ referring to felines next month, next year
and on into the future as far as we can see.
Arbitrariness
This feature of language refers to the fact that the words do not have any kind of essential connection to the things
that they stand for. A cat is not like the word ‘cat’. It isn’t a short sort of squished object made of three parts. It
doesn’t make a noise like ‘cat’. It isn’t shaped like something that is partly semi-circular, partly triangular and partly
cross-like. Hockett used the examples of the word ‘whale’, which is a pretty small word for a very large animal
contrasted with the word ‘micro-organism’ which is just the opposite – a very large word for a very small creature
(Hockett 6).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Can all knowledge be expressed in words or symbols?
Is it possible to think or know without language?
Displacement
This feature of language refers to the fact that language allows us to recall, describe and share information about
events, people, objects and ideas which are removed from us in time and space. We can talk about the time that
Duality
The duality of language refers to the fact that a language is made up of a set of sounds or letters which are then
recombined into larger units – words and sentences. In English, for example, the letter ‘q’ doesn’t mean anything by
itself, nor do the letters ‘u’, ‘r’ or ‘k’, but combined with ‘a’, they do, altogether, make up the word ‘quark’, which is
a word that refers to a particular kind of subatomic particle in physics.
In English, there are a very few letters which can, depending on how they are used, be words all by themselves. ‘A’
and ‘I’ can each be used as words in sentences, but they can also be used in other words in which their meaning,
when they stand alone, is completely irrelevant. Compare these two sentences:
I bought a book yesterday at a school book sale.
The book sale generated funds for the primary school.
Productivity
This feature of language is related to the idea of duality. Languages are made up of a relatively small number of
symbols – letters, words or other characters, such as the kanji in Japanese. Despite the small number, however, we
can combine these symbols to create a virtually unlimited number of utterances or sentences (Hockett 6).
‘Productivity’ also describes the fact that you can create a sentence which no one has ever created before, but which
will be perfectly understandable by fluent users of the language. Consider this sentence, for example:
After finding the geocache called ‘The Bard’ in Dallas, Texas, my brother and I were so excited that we
decided that we would take on the challenge of designing a comparable challenge for geocachers in
Virginia, and that we would include, as part of the caching challenge, a specially-built puzzle using a
wood block and some dowels.
Perhaps you need to know a little something about geocaching in order to fully understand that sentence, but it is a
perfectly grammatical sentence which describes a perfectly plausible real-world situation, and the odds that anyone
else has written or said exactly this sentence are extremely small. Productivity also describes the fact that we can
create perfectly good sentences which describe events or people that do not exist in the real world. Here’s an
example:
The Venusian traveller arrived at the intergalactic space station low on fuel and desperately hungry,
hoping like crazy that there would be Ogolunic Stew available for dinner.
ACTIVITY
Try productivity for yourself:
1 Write three sentences which you feel confident have never been written or uttered before. If you
speak more than one language, try it in each language.
2 How difficult was it to do this?
3 Do you think any other speakers of that language or those languages would have any difficulty
understanding your sentences?
4 What does the concept of productivity reveal about the scope of language in terms of its relation to
knowledge?
We recognize them all as cats, even though they look quite different from each other in some ways. We can also
recognize the following animals as cats, even though they are very different from the cats above:
The word ‘cat’ consists of only three letters, but it can be used to name a huge variety of animals. We would not be
confused about what animal was being referred to because the context would let us know. This capacity of a symbol
to stand for many things also contributes to the productivity of languages.
Traditional transmission
This final feature of language that we are going to discuss refers to the fact that language is passed from one
generation to the next. We are undoubtedly born with some innate capacity to learn language, but the specifics of the
language that we learn are acquired from exposure to the culture around us. Babies born to English-speaking parents
in Australia learn Australian English. Those same babies, however, had they been born to Japanese-speaking parents
in Japan, would have been native speakers of Japanese. Some children are born to bilingual families and so learn to
speak two languages natively. Perhaps you are friends with students whose parents immigrated from another country
and who were born into households where the parents speak one language because they were raised entirely in a
country where another language is spoken. Those children might be native speakers of your country and may speak
their parents’ language only a little or not at all. Language is learned. What language you speak depends on the
language that was transmitted to you by the people around you.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the transmission of knowledge from one person or generation to another depend on language?
A final implication of the fact that language is traditionally transmitted is the fact that it allows us to preserve
knowledge and pass it down from one generation to the next, so that, over time, human understanding of the world
increases. Technological development is a direct result of the fact that language is transmitted rather than inborn. We
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
create more and more complicated technologies by building (literally and figuratively) on the knowledge that came
before.
We have been discussing spoken and written language so far, but other familiar forms of language also share these
characteristics: sign language and braille, for example, exhibit all of these features and can be understood, therefore,
as fully developed languages. ‘Body language’, on the other hand, although it is called language, does not have most
of these features. Certainly, we can communicate with our bodies – we are particularly good at conveying emotions
through gestures and facial expressions – but ‘body language’ does not have any of the six features that we named
on page 114.
Equally interesting is the fact that the behaviour of the other monkeys when they hear the calls differs depending on
the alarm that is sent:
The ‘snake’ alarm call would cause the group to stand up and study the ground, while the ‘eagle’ alarm
call would see them dive into bushes or the middle of trees where an aerial predator could not reach them.
The ‘leopard’ alarm call would send individuals scuttling up to the very tops of the trees. (Sayfarth, et al)
These facts about the Vervet monkeys would seem to suggest that they have at least some language – there are
apparently semantical units, specific calls, with fixed meaning, and enough information is conveyed through those
calls to tell the other monkeys what they need to do in response. The sounds also seem to be arbitrary – they don’t
mimic the sounds that leopards or pythons make, for example. Infant monkeys do not make the calls perfectly; they
make mistakes. Juveniles are better, and Vervets seem to master the making of the three different calls over time.
So, the calls are to some degree, apparently, transmitted from generation to generation, rather than being instinctive.
That, however, seems to be the limit of Vervet ‘language’. The sounds are fixed in meaning; the sounds of the
communication system are not dual in nature, and so the ‘language’ is not productive as human languages are.
Vervet monkeys can alert each other to an immediate danger in the here and now, but they cannot ‘discuss’ events
from other times or places. We can say that, although their communication system has some features of language, it
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
is not a fully developed language.
The honey bee is another creature who seems to have language of a kind. Scout honey bees are famous for being
able to convey to the bees back in the hive where they can go for rich sources of pollen. There are two types of
dance: the round dance and the waggle dance. The former alerts the other bees to the fact that there is a nectar source
relatively nearby – from 25–100 m away (‘Dance Language of the Honey Bee’). This dance does not offer any
information about direction, and the bees simply fly out of the hive in all directions looking for the nectar source.
The waggle dance, on the other hand, conveys information about distance to a nectar source which is further away.
The bee communicates the direction the other bees need to go by facing a direction during the straight portion of the
waggle dance which indicates the relationship of the nectar source to the Sun. Distance is conveyed by the amount
of time that it takes the dancing bee to complete one circuit of the dance. ‘For example a bee may dance 8–9 circuits
in 15 seconds for a food source 200 meters away, 4–5 circuits for a food source 1000 meters away, and 3 circuits in
15 seconds for a food source 2000 meters away’ (‘Dance Language of the Honey Bee’). You can use the QR code
on the right to watch an example of honey bees doing the waggle dance.
This ‘language’ seems to be in some ways quite sophisticated and also somewhat more flexible than the
communication system of the Vervet monkeys. Like the monkeys, the communicating bee is passing information
along which causes particular behaviours on the part of the receivers. The dance can be seen to be semantic, in that
the shapes the movement takes have particular meanings. The ‘language’ is also to some degree productive, since
there is a wide variety of information that can be conveyed with the few segments of the dance, but the productivity
is limited to how far away and in what direction nectar sources reside.
Honey bee language is not dual in nature, and although it does indicate where something is in a place other than
where the bees are, it is not capable of full displacement, as they cannot ‘discuss’ events removed in time. It is not
known for sure whether the dance behaviour is instinctive or learned (Donnelly), but as honey bees live only six
weeks, there is not a lot of time for this skill to be passed along through traditional transmission with its consequent
need for trial and error and improvement over time. We would say, then, that although the honey bee’s system of
communication is quite sophisticated, it is also limited to one particular – albeit very important – subject, and so
must be seen as a communication system, rather than as a language.
ACTIVITY
The arts
Language plays a central role in some art forms, of course: poems and novels, for example, consist of words. In
drama and songs with lyrics, words are only a part of the artwork, but they play a significant central role. In other art
forms, however, words play a minimal role or are absent altogether. Think of paintings and sculptures, which may
involve no language other than a title – and which may even be untitled. Classical music may sometimes involve
words, as with the ‘Ode to Joy’ in the final movement of Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9. That symphony was, in fact,
the first time a major composer included vocal music in a symphony (Bonds 387). More often there are no words at
all in classical music, as with Beethoven’s other eight symphonies. Dance usually relies on movement alone without
words. So for most artworks, it would seem that language does not play a significant role; however, some kinds of
paintings do rely on sets of fixed symbols to convey messages to viewers, and so we might consider whether in
those cases at least, art is, or has, a language.
In the Netherlands, the Vanitas school of still-life painting was popular from about 1550 to about 1650 (The Editors
of the Encyclopaedia Britannica). The word ‘Vanitas’ is the Latin word for ‘vanity’, and the paintings focused on
the vanity of life in the face of inevitable death. These paintings relied on a number of fixed symbols that would
have been easily recognized by viewers in the seventeenth century. The painting on page 121, Vanitas Still Life With
Flowers and Skull (1642) by Adriaen van Utrecht, used many of those set symbols.
The skull is an obvious symbol of human death, and, in this painting, it is surrounded by many objects that
symbolize self-indulgence and the greed for material objects. The pearls, the gold chain, the ring and the coins
represent the idea of wealth. The open chronometer (a portable timepiece similar to a modern-day pocket watch)
Mathematics
Mathematics is another area of knowledge which might be seen as being or having a language. You are probably
familiar with the ‘alphabet’ of mathematics: numbers and a variety of symbols such as +, –, =, ≥ and ∞.
Mathematics can also use letters of the alphabet to stand in for a number which is unknown. Unlike the letters of the
English alphabet, numerals do have meaning in their own right: 3, 8 and 9 all have recognizable meaning. Like the
letters of the English alphabet, however, they can be combined in a virtually limitless number of ways to create new
statements. Here are a few examples:
We can already see, then, that the language of mathematics features many of the characteristics that we examined
earlier: semanticity, arbitrariness, duality, productivity and, certainly, traditional transmission. No one is born
knowing the language of mathematics; it has to be taught and it does allow us to preserve knowledge for future
generations. As you will see in Chapter 8, the fact that new knowledge builds on old knowledge is possibly even
more significant in mathematics than in other areas of knowledge – indeed, it is central to the whole pursuit. We can
also consider that mathematical language is capable of displacement, since mathematics describes features of reality
in general and throughout time. Mathematics, then, unlike the communication systems of Vervets and honey bees,
and in contrast to the symbolic function of elements of Vanitas still-life paintings, can be seen as having a fully-
fledged language.
ACTIVITY
Working with a partner, think about the following question, which is debated among mathematicians:
Does mathematics have a language or is mathematics a language?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Perspective
The effort to determine what we are talking about when we are talking about language reveals two very
important perspectives:
• the perspective that language is a thing whose features we can identify and describe
• the perspective that the object part of language cannot be separated from the minds which produce
and use language.
EE links
An exploration into the history of linguistics and how beliefs about language have changed over time as
we have come to know more about the psychology both of humans and of other animals could be the
basis for an interesting extended essay. A possible EE research question might be:
How have changes in understanding about psychology over time influenced our knowledge of what a
language is?
You probably don’t know what that sentence actually means because it has many words which are highly technical
(it is a description of a particular kind of protein that an inorganic chemist might want to know about), but, so long
as you can actually read it, you couldn’t stop your mind trying to make sense of it. You can almost certainly identify
which of those words are nouns and which are verbs or adjectives. You can recognize that it is a grammatical
sentence. Contrast that with the following sentence:
and but cat cat cat, chase fox fox had of on out run. The the the the the the to to tried turned yard,
IA prompt
6 How does the way that we organize or classify knowledge affect what we know?
Spoken language works the same way: spoken language consists of a series of arbitrary sounds. If you don’t speak
the language, you will perceive the sounds as meaningless noise.
Try it: use the QR code to listen to the audio clip in which a man from the San culture in the Kalahari desert is
speaking in the click language of Khoisan. We are betting you cannot understand what the sounds mean. If you
listen to someone speaking in your native language, however, the words automatically take on meaning. You
couldn’t keep them from doing so. Language is wired into your mind in such a way that you do not have conscious
control over whether it is on or off. It is automatic.
Considering language from the perspective of cognitive ability provides us with a more complex understanding of
what we are talking about when we are talking about language – not just the sounds or written symbols, but also the
thinking skills which are part of the system.
Some people, of course, develop much bigger vocabularies than others. William Shakespeare, often considered to be
the greatest writer in English, used many more than 5000 words: in all of his plays combined, he used between 25
000 and 30 000 words (Huld), depending on how the person counting determines what constitutes different words.
Shakespeare – or the printers who printed his works – often varied the spelling of words, for example.
One final observation about vocabulary: in general, the bigger the vocabulary you have, the more you can know
(this idea will be explored in more detail later). The reason for this claim is that we tend to learn easy, simple words
first, and then we develop a more sophisticated vocabulary as we grow older and learn more – whether from formal
schooling or from other experience in the real world. We can also define ‘more sophisticated vocabulary’ as
vocabulary which conveys subtle, nuanced meanings. The word ‘implement’, for example, is a more sophisticated
word than ‘use’. They are not interchangeable: to use something just means that that thing is a tool to help someone
achieve a purpose. To implement something, however, means more than just to use it: to implement something is to
put it in place for the first time. We can implement a new programme of employee evaluation, or a new tax code, or
a new curriculum, but we cannot implement a hammer or a book or a potato peeler. It would be correct and clear to
say that we are using a programme of employee evaluation or a curriculum, but the verb ‘use’ does not have the
additional implication that those programmes are new to the organization in which we operate. Other examples of
nuanced knowledge of vocabulary include the difference between ‘imply’ and ‘infer’ and the difference between
‘reluctant’ and ‘reticent’. Many people misuse these words, and, in so doing, they may be miscommunicating their
intentions, because they may be talking to people who do know the correct meanings.
ACTIVITY
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
1 Look up the words ‘imply’ and ‘infer’, and ‘reluctant’ and ‘reticent’, and make sure you understand the
differences between the two words in each pair.
2 Write a sentence for each one of the four words and make sure that your sentences include context
which reveals the precise meaning of each term.
3 What do the responses to questions 1 and 2 reveal about the relationship between language and
knowledge?
IA prompt
20 What is the relationship between personal experience and knowledge?
The ability to use vocabulary precisely, and to understand vocabulary precisely, results in more nuanced
understanding. For this reason, in this textbook we have decided to use more sophisticated vocabulary when that
vocabulary conveys important connotations. Because those words may very well be unfamiliar to many readers, we
have provided detailed explanations of what they mean on the pages where the words are used. This will allow you
to understand the writing here better, and it will help you to develop your own vocabulary. (The word ‘connotation’
is defined on page 15.)
Regardless of how many vocabulary words you know, they are, in and of themselves, only a part of what you know
when you know a language. If you are a fluent user of a language, you also know a great deal about how the
grammar works – even if you cannot use all the technical terminology for grammatical structures and functions. You
know, for example, about the following:
• word order (as we demonstrated earlier with the sentence about the cat and the fox)
• verb tenses
• punctuation (if the language is written)
• how tone contributes to meaning (both in spoken and in written language)
• when language is metaphorical or satirical or sarcastic
• how context changes meaning (as we saw with the example of the word ‘quark’ on page 116).
Let’s take a look at just two sentences written in English and see how many things we can identify that demonstrate
what we know when we know English. These are the two opening sentences of Jane Austen’s novel, Pride and
Prejudice:
Learner profile
Thinkers
How does thinking critically about language help us to develop a richer understanding of a literary (or
other) text?
Here is a list of some of the things, other than vocabulary, that a person who truly understands these two sentences
knows about how English works:
• ‘Universally acknowledged’ in the first line refers to people and not to the Universe. The suggestion is that every
human knows what is about to follow in the rest of the sentence.
• To say that something is ‘universally acknowledged’ is hyperbole. There is probably no belief which is held by
every human being.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
• The use of hyperbole in this situation is ironic.
• The use of the verb ‘must be’ here suggests an inevitability to the situation. All men who are single and wealthy,
in other words, want wives. This is not a matter of choice.
• Cultural context: the use of the phrase ‘a good fortune’ suggests an older time period. We would be unlikely to use
that term today to describe a wealthy man – we would say that he is wealthy or that he is rich.
• The full stop (period) at the end of the first sentence signals the end of the sentence.
• The use of ‘however’ at the beginning of the second sentence does not mean ‘but’; rather it is a modifier which
works with the word ‘little’ to suggest that it doesn’t matter if no one knows even a little bit about the feelings or
views of this man. His views, in other words, are completely irrelevant.
• The whole long phrase beginning with ‘However’ and ending with the comma is an introductory phrase; the
sentence is actually about ‘this truth’, which is the actual subject of the sentence.
• We may or may not know that the clause before the comma is a dependent clause and the bit after the comma is an
independent clause and together these two clauses make up what is known as a complex sentence.
• You know that the comma signals that the first clause is dependent – even if you don’t know the term ‘dependent
clause’.
• Cultural context: the idea that the man in question here is considered to be the rightful ‘property’ of one of the
daughters of the neighbourhood is ironic, because in the very early nineteenth century, married women were not
allowed to own property – their property became the property of their husbands.
• The tone of the narrator in these two sentences is satirical: in the first sentence, she makes a statement which is
actually fairly outrageous: on the surface of it, the sentence offers us a simple idea that every rich single man is
looking for a wife. That statement cannot possibly be true, any more than the statement that everyone knows that
was, but in the second sentence, she lets us know that we are going to encounter people in a particular
neighbourhood who think this way, and the narrator wants the readers to realize that we are intended to see these
people as being rather silly.
• Even reading the two sentences silently to yourself, you probably could hear, in your mind, how the words are to
be pronounced. If you were to hear them read out loud, you would recognize the way the tone and stresses the
reader used contributed to the message that this passage is satirical. If you were to read it out loud, you would
show that you know how to say the words and where to put the stresses.
The above list names just a few of the things that we know when we know a language. Neither of these two
sentences contained a metaphor or a symbol or a literary or historical allusion. Nor did they contain an idiom, such
as ‘it’s raining cats and dogs’, which is a phrase meaning that it’s raining very hard, even though rain would not
seem to have anything to do with cats or dogs.
We do not have space in this chapter to try to identify in detail all the nuances of language use that reveal what
people who speak a language fluently and with skill know when we say that they know a language. This short look
at the question, however, should give you a good idea of the kinds of things that are involved in knowing a
language. Knowing a language is a spectacularly complex skill, and as you work through your TOK course, we
encourage you to pay attention to the different ways that language is used in different areas of knowledge and in
different knowledge situations.
This is not to say that language is our only means of knowing things, nor can we say that language alone is sufficient
for us to be able to make knowledge. In Chapter 2, you saw how the various kinds of tools that we have as
individuals to help us make knowledge – reason, sense perception, imagination and so on – work together in tandem.
Language, however, is our primary means of transmitting ideas, hypotheses and conclusions from one person to the
other.
The proposal that the scope of language as a means of conveying knowledge is virtually unbounded leaves us still
with several important questions related to the scope of language as it pertains to knowledge:
• If the primary function of language is to connect minds and transmit ideas, thoughts and feelings, does this mean
that individuals working on developing new knowledge on some particular topic can do so without using words?
Can new knowledge, in other words, ever be developed without language playing a role?
• Can we put all knowledge into words – either written or spoken? Is there knowledge which either cannot be
transmitted from one person to another or which must be transmitted using some other method, such as touch?
• Does our language limit or define what we can know?
We will consider these three questions in the next two sections of this chapter.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
To what extent does language allow us to make our private experiences public?
As you can imagine from these numbers, this means that the variety of languages in the world is not evenly
distributed over the globe. In fact, in Papua New Guinea alone, 840 languages are spoken, with another 710 spoken
in Indonesia. By way of contrast, only 1058 languages are spoken in all of the Americas, and only 288 in all of
Europe. You can use the QR code to view an interactive version of a world map, which allows you to explore the
diversity of languages in the world. Visit your country and see how many languages are spoken that you were not
necessarily aware of.
IA prompt
21 What is the relationship between knowledge and culture?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Culture
We noted earlier in this chapter that the language you learn is the language of the culture in which you
are raised. If you had been born in some other country where a language other than your native
language is spoken, you would have grown up learning that language. Language is necessarily related
to culture – there are words for things in one culture that don’t exist in another culture. Do you have a
word for the object in this picture, for example?
The object in this photo is called a qulliq and is used by the Inuit people for a variety of purposes. It is a
lamp which is lit with oil and burns a wick made of Arctic cotton called suputi and a special moss called
ijju/maniq. It is tended with a hook called the taqquti. The lamp symbolizes the flame keeper in the home
– the woman. The qulliq can be used for many purposes including drying clothes, melting ice, lighting
spiritual ceremonies and providing warmth and energy in the home (‘Fact Sheet: Information About the
Qulliq’).
ACTIVITY
Think of an object which is significant in your life. If you are a religious person, perhaps you can think of
an object which is important to your religion. Or you might decide to choose something important to your
religious community.
If you are not religious, or if you prefer not to choose an object related to your religion, choose something
else of significance to your family or another cultural group in which you live, such as an important
document, a flag, or maybe a statue which has significance in your town or country. For this exercise, it
would be better to pick an object that has shared meaning in a community, rather than something which
has personal meaning just for you individually.
Now think about all the associations you have with that object.
1 What feelings arise when you think about it or work with it?
2 What is its symbolic significance?
3 How would you feel if someone stole or destroyed that object?
4 What is the role of the object in your community, and what is the effect of the object and its use on the
community?
5 Now imagine how much a person who has no idea what that object is does not know about the object
itself and about the greater community to which the object has importance. If you named the object for
that person and told them a little bit about its function, what would they still be missing?
This activity should give you some sense of how much you don’t know about the Inuit people and culture
unless you are Inuit because you don’t know what the qulliq is.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What knowledge might be lost if the whole world shared one common language?
The understanding that you can lack some significant understanding of a culture because you don’t speak its
language is one kind of way in which we can think of language as shaping what we know and what we don’t know.
Another way that language influences knowledge is the varying nature of how different languages depict the world
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
differently.
Learner profile
Open-minded
How can learning about the way that other cultures perceive the world help you to develop the trait of
open-mindedness?
It was probably much easier for you to answer the questions about what is to your left and right than it was to
answer questions about your relationship to things in various cardinal directions. Possibly you could figure out what
was to your northeast, if you either happen to know what direction the building you are in is facing and how you are
oriented to the front of the building, or if you are somewhere where you can see the Sun, and it isn’t high noon or
nighttime, when you cannot tell where the Sun is relative to the east–west pattern it travels during the day.
The fact that the former questions are easier for English speakers than the latter is directly attributable to the way in
which we use language in order to orient ourselves in space. Other languages, however, do not use ‘left’ and ‘right’,
but, rather, require speakers to identify themselves in terms of their orientation to the cardinal directions in order to
discuss their location in space.
CASE STUDY
Kuuk Thaayorre
One language that requires speakers to use cardinal directions to discuss their location in space is Kuuk
Thaayorre, a language of the Pormpuraaw community on Cape York in northern Australia. The ability to
identify one’s own orientation to north, south, east and west is deeply embedded in the language. Even
to say ‘hello’, one must know where one is facing: ‘So the way you say hi in Kuuk Thaayorre, one of the
languages spoken here, is to say, which way are you heading? And the answer should be, north,
northeast in the far distance; how about you?’ (Boroditsky).
It is difficult for us to imagine what it would be like to operate in a language which doesn’t use ‘left’ or
‘right’. Suppose that you were gardening with a member of the Pormpuraaw and you wanted to alert him
to the fact that he had cut the little finger on his left hand. You can’t say: ‘Look! The finger on your left
hand is bleeding!’ You would have to say: ‘Look! The finger on your southwest hand is bleeding!’– or
‘north’, or ‘northeast’, or whatever direction is the correct one for how that hand is oriented to the way
that the person is facing. If the person then turns around to look at you blankly, because he can’t feel
any blood and he can’t figure out who you’re talking to, when you repeat the warning, you have to
change what you say, because now the person is facing a different direction and his hand, therefore, is
oriented differently to true north.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do people from different linguistic or cultural backgrounds live, in some sense, in different worlds?
Many languages assign gender to nouns. The gender of inanimate objects, it turns out, influences the way that
people think about those objects. In German, for example, a bridge is feminine: die Brücke. In Spanish, however, a
bridge is masculine: el puente. Many other objects have the opposite genders in those two languages. When speakers
were asked to describe characteristics of the objects, speakers of Spanish focused on more ‘manly’ characteristics
such as strength and endurance, while speakers of German tended to focus on more ‘feminine’ characteristics, such
as elegance and beauty (Deutscher). The ramifications of these unconscious associations are not yet widely
understood, but they could be quite far-ranging. Guy Deutscher, writing for the New York Times, suggests that when
young minds associate gender with language, those language learners begin to associate objects in the inanimate
world with the kinds of emotional responses they have in response to human genders. He asks us to consider
whether thinking of bridges as either male or female might influence the way one designs a bridge. Current
knowledge of the way that gender is encoded in our brains cannot answer that question, but we can imagine that our
social attitudes toward gender might be naturally associated with inanimate objects that we think of as having a
gender.
When we think about what we know when we know a particular language, then, we see that the language we speak
helps to shape our understanding of our place in the world, our understanding of time and the nature of physical
objects – among many other things. The fact that our language shapes what we must know, does not, however, shape
what we can know.
In 1940, linguist Benjamin Whorf published a now-discredited idea which came to be known as the Whorfian
hypothesis, claiming that language shapes what it is possible for us to think. The theory held on for a long time,
although it eventually collapsed when it turned out that Whorf had falsified the evidence upon which he based it
(Deutscher). If you think about it a little more closely, Whorf’s claims cannot possibly be true. If it were not possible
to think about anything for which we do not already have words, then it would not be possible for us to learn
anything new. You probably had no concept for a qulliq a few minutes ago, but you saw a picture of one and learned
the word for it, and now you do have such a concept. You were able to think about the qulliq – to perceive it in your
mind – before you knew the word. Language does not shape what it is possible for us to think, but it does shape
what we do think, at least initially.
IA prompt
14 Does some knowledge belong only to particular communities of knowers?
Given the intimate relationship between culture and language, what is lost every time a language dies out? What will
be the consequences to our shared knowledge if 50 per cent or more of the world’s languages are lost? What
perspectives on human experience might be lost to us permanently?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
If a language dies, does knowledge die with it?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do professional interpreters and translators have any special ethical obligations?
The problem is, then, that anyone learning something through a translation is not likely to be able to know in a truly
detailed and nuanced way what the original speaker or text actually said. Knowledge gained from a translation is
knowledge gained from a new speech or text based on an original, but not an exact copy.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Interpretation
The problem of translation brings up the concept of interpretation. Often when we think about
interpretation, we are thinking about interpretation of particular data or observations or evidence, but in
the case of translation, we are dealing with an interpretation of an original written text or act of speech
(Campbell). The translator has already had to interpret what was being said and make decisions about
what to pass along. The reader or listener of the translation must also then try to interpret the
significance of what he heard, and so the knowledge that comes out of that interaction is the result of
twice-interpreted information.
DEEPER THINKING
Translation and technology
Another issue that arises out of translation comes about because of developing technology. In Chapter
3, we saw some of the ways in which technology influences knowledge. At the beginning of this chapter,
we considered the question of how well Google Translate represented the paragraph in Nyanja. With
regard to language and translation, another important technology is the development of the universal
translator. At the time of writing, there are a good number of universal translators available for sale and
they have proven to be quite popular for travellers.
We have seen that language is one of our primary means of making and sharing knowledge in virtually every arena
in which knowledge is produced. We have seen how the language that we speak requires us to perceive the world in
particular ways, so that the wide diversity of world languages that we presently have reflects an equally wide
diversity of perspectives on what it means to be human. We have also seen how thoroughly interconnected language
and culture are, so that to be truly fluent in a language means that we must have rich knowledge of the culture in
which that language flourishes. In the next section, we will consider the methods which we use for making
knowledge of languages, and we will investigate language as a method for making knowledge in other areas.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Power
Competence in a language is certainly highly desirable. If you are a competent speaker of a language,
you can navigate your way through the world wherever they speak that language. You can make
yourself understood and you can probably get much of what you want. That ability is a huge benefit: if
you can make yourself understood, you have a certain amount of power in the world that people who
cannot speak that language do not possess.
The better you are at using your language, however, the more power you have over your ability to
navigate the part of the world where that language is spoken. You have possibly discovered that to make
yourself clear – especially in writing – is a much more difficult proposition than having a casual
conversation with a friend or even with a stranger on the street. If you want to have the ability to
persuade others to see things the way you do, you need to have the kind of language skills that allow
you to be persuasive: control over tone, the ability to organize your thoughts in a logical way and the
ability to make your listeners feel that what you are saying is right – both in the sense of true and in the
sense of morally right.
David Crystal, an expert in linguistics and author of many books about the English language, describes
the ability to sway others with your language this way:
There’s nothing quite like the thrill of successful eloquence, of knowing that you’ve said what
you wanted to say in the most effective way and caused an audience … to be delighted,
enthused, persuaded, and moved by the way you’ve said it. (Crystal xi)
If you have the power to make yourself both understood and convincing you are in a much better
position to have power over your life: to get people to do what you want them to do, or to let you do
whatever it is that you want to do and to take a leadership role in the workplace when problems need to
be solved or projects need to be developed. Perhaps most importantly from a TOK perspective, the
more mastery you have over your language, the less others will be able to manipulate you into going
along with a version of the world which benefits them, but not you, or to convince you to believe what is
not true.
An example of how skilled knowledge of language can keep you from being swayed by inaccurate
information can be seen in a blog post that went viral at the end of June 2019.
In order to become skilled with your language, however, you have to do a lot of much more conscientious work. In
school, you likely studied (and continue to study) formal rules of your native language, grammatical structures, the
correct use of verb tenses, the various ways you can construct complete sentences and more vocabulary. Your
teachers set you writing tasks of increasing difficulty over time, and, ideally, your skill with the written language
gradually increases.
Practice, in other words, is the means by which we develop mastery, and even artistry, with language.
ACTIVITY
Read the following letter, written during the Civil War in the United States by a soldier who was just
about to go off to his first battle. In the letter, he tries to explain to his beloved wife why he feels that he
must do his part as a soldier, despite his love for her. A week later, Sullivan Ballou died at Manassas, in
the first major battle of the War. After you read the letter, discuss the knowledge that Sullivan Ballou had
of language. What skills did he exhibit in writing the letter? What skills do you, as a reader, need, in
order to read and appreciate its beauty, beyond its straightforward meaning?
How do these skills help you to know more effectively?
DEEPER THINKING
Use of language in the technological world
Consider the language by which you are surrounded on a regular basis. Do you watch a lot of television?
Spend a lot of time reading on the internet? How rich and sophisticated is the language which you
encounter in those places? Think about the language that people use in texting.
Text messages tend to abbreviate language, both in terms of spelling and in terms of sentence structure.
Can one develop one’s skill as a reader and composer of text messages in the same way that one can
develop one’s skill as a reader and writer of elegant prose? For many people in today’s world, texting is
probably a more useful skill than the knowledge of how to produce eloquent speech and writing is.
Certainly, most people will send text messages far more often than they will be called upon to write a
powerful essay or speech or to stand in front of an audience and try to persuade its members to feel
passionately about something.
What knowledge, if any, of language do you think is lost if we confine most of our written interactions
with each other to text messages? What knowledge, if any, is lost if most people were to fail to develop
the capacity for powerful, eloquent language? Is the utility of language, that is, its usefulness, the most
important determiner of what knowledge of language we should have?
ACTIVITY
Think about your own experience learning a second language. Ask yourself the following questions:
1 What are the primary resources that you rely on to help you learn the language? Your teacher?
Textbooks? Television programmes in the target language?
2 Do you have access to many native speakers of that language while you are studying it?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is it the case that if we cannot express something, we don’t know it?
If the primary function of language is to connect minds and transmit ideas, thoughts and feelings, does this mean
that individuals working on developing new knowledge on some particular topic can do so without using words?
Can new knowledge, in other words, ever be developed without language playing a role?
ACTIVITY
1 Use the QR code on the right to watch the video. As you watch, try to figure out what the magician is
doing. Notice what happens in your mind as you watch.
2 Were you able to just observe and take in the images without using any words?
Remembering that once we learn language, it becomes automatic, we’re betting that you were not able
to separate the words out of your observations. What you saw probably generated questions and those
questions took the shape of words. Maybe you had some ideas about what the magician was doing to
create the illusions. If so, those ideas most likely took the shape of words. You experienced something
similar at the beginning of this chapter when you watched the video of the Rube Goldberg machine and
tried to understand what was happening.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Power
An ability with language can, as we have seen, give a person considerable power over many aspects of
their life. We have also seen how one person might have power over another person if language is used
as a weapon. Language is not, however, all-powerful. There are only a very few circumstances in which
language has the power to create a reality: just saying something is so almost never makes it so.
ACTIVITY
Language can sometimes shape reality:
• Your teacher is empowered to decide when your next unit examination will be, and they can then
make that date the actual date simply by telling you that it will be so.
• Religious leaders such as a Catholic priest or a Muslim Imam can make a declaration of marriage, as
can people who have been officially licensed by the appropriate government office, such as judges
and county clerks. When those people pronounce a couple ‘man and wife’, that couple is, legally,
married. If you pronounce someone married, unless you have been properly licensed, no marriage
takes place.
• A boss can fire an employee simply by declaring ‘you’re fired’.
How many other instances can you think of in which the simple declaration of a fact by a person who has
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
the actual authority to declare it has the power to create a particular reality? List as many as you can.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Culture
The role of language in giving people the power to make pronouncements of marriage is culturally
determined. You cannot simply declare someone married, unless you have been properly licensed in
your country, but neither can the Catholic priest in all situations. A priest or Imam cannot just stop two
people on the street and declare them married. The power of the words exists only in the particular
context of the marriage ceremony. Chapter 5 (Knowledge and Indigenous Societies) discusses the
power of ritual for transmitting language in much more detail.
The fact that making a declaration only makes something true in a very few instances means that any professional
practitioner who wishes to establish that their knowledge is true and justified must go through the process of not just
sharing that knowledge with others, but also of explaining and justifying the claims. You will find that this process
is necessary in every knowledge-making endeavour. It is important not to just accept claims at face value, but rather
to assess and validate them. The same thing is true in mathematics, science, history and so on. As you study each of
the topics in your course, look for the processes which exist in each area for the sharing and checking of the
knowledge claims made in that subject.
You will investigate these processes in more detail later, but here is one example.
CASE STUDY
Andrew Wiles and Fermat’s Last Theorem
In 1993, Andrew Wiles, a mathematician at Princeton University, gave a series of three lectures at a
maths conference in Cambridge, England (Rubin and Silverberg). The lectures built up to an
announcement that Wiles had solved a 300-year-old maths problem: Fermat’s Last Theorem. His
announcement, however, was insufficient for the mathematical world to simply accept the claim as true –
even after lectures over three days. The work was sent, as all mathematical work is, for peer review.
You may have experienced peer review of some of your schoolwork, in which one of your classmates
read your work or listened to your presentation and gave you feedback about how to improve it.
Professional peer review is similar in the sense that a colleague – an expert in the area in which the new
knowledge claims are being made – reads the work and comments, but beyond that, professional peer
review is rather different from your classroom experience. You can generally choose whether or not you
are going to attend to the advice that your peer reviewer gives you; however, a professional researcher –
in this case, Andrew Wiles – does not have that option. A professional peer reviewer has the power to
stop something from being published altogether. If they find an error, they will send the work back and
require that it be revised – even if revision means re-running experiments or starting almost entirely from
scratch. If a professional cannot justify their claims to the satisfaction of the peer reviewer, then their
claims are rejected and do not become a part of the accepted knowledge in that area.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Certainty
The example of Andrew Wiles’ journey in trying to establish his proof as knowledge illustrates a process
which is widely used in many areas of knowledge. This debate – with language as the primary method –
is integral to establishing the credibility of knowledge claims.
We have seen that the methods of making knowledge of a language can make a difference in the degree of mastery
that the speaker will eventually attain. We have also seen that mastery in a language can give an individual power in
the world, both in terms of what that person can accomplish and in terms of being able to resist other people’s
attempts to deceive or manipulate. Language is also an important tool in making, justifying and sharing knowledge
in all other situations, including the professional development of knowledge. Given the importance of language in
the knowledge-generation process, the question of whether language is used ethically takes on great significance.
ACTIVITY
Read the following very short story – a 2009 contribution to the ‘Six Word Stories’ website – written by
Richard Powers:
Lie detector eyeglasses perfected: Civilization collapses. (Powers)
1 What does the story suggest about human nature?
2 What does the story suggest about the power of lies?
3 Since civilization seemed to be stable enough before people could see all the lies for what they were,
does that suggest that lies are fine as long as no one finds out?
4 If a lie causes tremendous damage, but no one ever finds out that the cause of the problem was a lie,
does that mean that the lie was not unethical?
5 Why might having to face the fact that lies are lies cause civilization to collapse?
The story is intriguing because it seems to suggest that the world can run along just fine so long as no one finds out
about lies. That in turn suggests that lies don’t have any real effect on the world – it’s only our knowledge of lies
that has an effect on the world. In The Winter’s Tale, William Shakespeare’s tyrant king, Leontes, has a speech in
which he describes what it’s like to find out about something he didn’t know about previously:
This is a striking image: if you drink a cup full of water and you don’t know that you swallowed a spider, then you
are not bothered at all, but if you drink a cup of water, and you swallow a spider that you see at the last minute – too
late! – you are horrified, and likely to vomit the spider back up.
The idea that lies have no effect if no one knows about them parallels the spider in the cup. There is one universal
ethical principle with regard to the making of knowledge, and that is that we are obligated, individually and
communally, to always do our very best to make accurate knowledge. If, at any point, it turns out that the
‘knowledge’ we developed was wrong, and therefore not knowledge at all, then we are obligated to go back to the
drawing board, as it were, and try again. We saw that principle in play with Andrew Wiles: when his ‘proof’ turned
out not to be a proof, he had to go back and do it over until it was right.
Learner profile
Principled
How does our use of language contribute to our being principled? How does our desire to be principled
influence our use of language?
An error, therefore, is not a violation of that ethical principle, so long as we acknowledge the error and make an
honest effort to figure out what the problem is.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Truth
There is a close relationship between language and truth. We need more than language, of course; we
need the speaker to have the knowledge necessary to recognize, understand and appreciate the truth,
but if we assume that that knowledge is in place, then language is the tool we use in order to transmit
the truth from one person to another. Lies are a matter of the deliberate misuse of language. To tell the
truth properly, however, we need more than just intention: we need the speaker or writer to have
mastered language well enough to be able to say exactly what is intended in the most clear and effective
way possible.
As receivers of language, we also need to have mastered language well enough to be able to
understand the connotations of words as well as the denotations. We need to be able to understand
nuances and implications, beyond the surface level of what is being said; otherwise, we will
misunderstand what is being said, and the truth will escape us. As receivers of language, we also need
more than mastery of language: we need the mental capacity and commitment to avoid willful
misunderstanding.
From both parties engaged in a communicative act, then, for truth to be conveyed, we need knowledge
of facts, mastery of language and commitment to truth.
ACTIVITY
Discuss the following questions with a partner, and then with the rest of your class.
1 Is a lie a violation of our obligation to try to be accurate?
2 If a person knows the truth about the answer to some problem, and then lies about it for some reason,
would we say that that person is not making a good-faith effort to find out the truth, but they would be
instead making a deliberate effort to hide that truth? Can you imagine any situation in which someone
would do that? For what reason might such an action be taken?
3 If a person does not know the truth about the answer to some problem, and then lies and says that he
does, is that the same thing as failing to make a good-faith effort to make accurate knowledge? Can
you imagine a situation in which someone would do that? For what reason might such an action be
taken?
4 In either of the two situations above, if no negative consequences ensued, would the lie be unethical?
5 If some negative consequence results in the world because of a lie, must the liar inevitably be caught?
If a liar is not caught, does that mean that no negative consequences resulted from the lie?
6 Do we each individually have a responsibility to work to become expert users of language in order to
be able to understand and to transmit truth?
IA prompt
10 What challenges are raised by the dissemination and/or communication of knowledge?
IA prompt
27 Does all knowledge impose ethical obligations on those who know it?
Ultimately, it is difficult to imagine how a lie about anything of real import could fail to have a negative
consequence in the world. Imagine what would happen if a mathematician lied about what is and isn’t true in
mathematics: mathematics is used in thousands of situations, from the design of bridges and buildings to the
calculation of how much money you have in the bank. If we didn’t know how maths really works, the bridges and
buildings would probably collapse, and the money you thought you had might turn out to be non-existent. If a
scientist lies about his findings, then we lose our ability to predict and control the world around us. If a politician
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
lies, we cannot make good decisions at the ballot box when we vote. If a technology expert lies, we cannot trust the
equipment that that expert built. If a religious leader lies, then we cannot form a good understanding of the spiritual
world that that religion describes. If holy texts are in essence a contract with our god, lies about what those texts
mean could conceivably destroy that relationship. We count on the experts to be telling us the truth because those
truths form the basis for almost everything we encounter in our daily lives.
We can see, therefore, that people who make knowledge and disseminate it to others have an ethical obligation to be
truthful. One final consideration, however, is that since some people do lie, and we know that we cannot always trust
the word of every ‘expert’, we each also have an ethical obligation to check what we are told. We are always partly
responsible for our own knowledge.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
In what ways can language be used to influence, persuade or manipulate people’s emotions?
Is ambiguity a shortcoming of language that must be eliminated, or can it also be seen as making a
positive contribution to knowledge and knowing?
Standard dialect
A final kind of power that we have not yet considered is the power of a standard dialect. A dialect is a variation of
speech which is related to where people live. Different dialects of English have different systems of punctuation and
grammar. Commonly, the ‘standard’ dialect in any language is the language of the people in power. In the United
States, for example, the standard language is the language of white culture, and it came to be the standard dialect
because it has been white people – largely wealthy white people – who have held the political power in the US for
centuries. People who speak non-standard dialects – particularly dialects of minority races, but also dialects from
some geographical parts of the country such as the Appalachian Mountains, are all too often looked down upon by
people who were born to the standard dialect.
Probably you have noticed the same phenomenon in your country: people who speak with certain accents are often
automatically considered by many people to be less intelligent, poorer, uneducated or even morally bad. People who
don’t speak a dialect which is close to the standard dialect cannot get certain kinds of jobs. Language can keep some
people trapped in a cycle of poverty for generations, simply because of the prejudices which the particular dialect
they speak trigger. This problem is not the result of unethical use of language, but rather it is an unethical belief
about the nature of language itself. Language is a learned skill; it is not a reflection of any inborn ability or
character.
CAS links
You could develop a CAS project which involves learning about which dialects of your community’s
language are spoken in your area and then helping to educate your classmates or others in your
community about the history and culture of the dialects. You could host a fair with displays about each of
the different dialects and begin collecting samples of the dialect to add to the collection of a local
historical museum as a celebration of the rich culture of the area, and as a means of combatting ill-
informed prejudices about language.
Learner profile
Caring
Can we empathize with other cultures and remain objective?
ACTIVITY
1 Look at the two pictures of Tom Torlino and list the ways in which his appearance has changed.
2 Why do you think Richard Henry Pratt and the staff of the Carlisle Indian Industrial School were so
keen to change their students’ physical appearances?
Towards the end of the nineteenth century, the United States’ expansion into the Great Plains of the North American
continent was nearly complete. California and Oregon on the west coast of the continent had already become states,
leaving only the Rocky Mountain territories and the western plains to be incorporated into the Union. The number of
Indigenous people that had been living in what would become the United States had been steadily diminishing since
the arrival of Europeans in the sixteenth century, and at the close of the nineteenth century it was a widely-held
belief that the Native Americans and their cultures would ultimately disappear. While not a solution to the
diminishing numbers, assimilation into the dominant culture was considered at the time the only opportunity to
support individual Indigenous peoples; to save the individual, they would need to stop being part of their Native
tribe and become a fully enculturated citizen of the United States. Towards this goal, Richard Henry Pratt, a United
States Civil War commander, working in conjunction with the United States government, opened The Carlisle
Indian Industrial School in 1879. His goal was one he believed to be charitable:
When we cease to teach the Indian that he is less than a man; when we recognize fully that he is capable in
all respects as we are, and that he only needs the opportunities and privileges which we possess to enable
him to assert his humanity and manhood; when we act consistently towards him in accordance with that
recognition; when we cease to fetter him to conditions which keep him in bondage, surrounded by
retrogressive influences; when we allow him the freedom of association and the developing influences of
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
social contact – then the Indian will quickly demonstrate that he can be truly civilized, and he himself will
solve the question of what to do with the Indian. (‘Excerpt from Pratt’s speech’)
For 30 years, the school took young Native Americans away from their lands, their homes and their families and
sent them to the Carlisle School in southern Pennsylvania. Over the duration of the school’s life, nearly 10 000
Indigenous boys and girls were made to be less like what they were at birth and more like what the new country
thought they should be. They were forced to abandon their language and their religions and, under harsh military
discipline, learn English, Christianity and everything it meant to be a US citizen at the close of the nineteenth
century.
Pratt’s falsely charitable belief that he was improving their lives was built on a deeper assumption that the people
needed improving. Despite the fact that their cultures were getting on happily with life for thousands of years before
the Europeans arrived, there was the pervading notion that they needed to be ‘civilized’.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How have government education policies and systems compromised the transmission of Indigenous
knowledge?
ACTIVITY
Identify and research an Indigenous culture. It could be one in your own country or on the other side of
the world. Perhaps you belong to an Indigenous culture.
1 In what ways do you think that culture is under threat by a dominant culture?
2 How has the threatened culture tried to reassert itself in the face of the dominant culture?
3 Can you articulate the struggle for survival in terms of knowledge?
4 Keep in mind what you find out as you read through the rest of the chapter. Does what we discuss
have relevance to the culture you’ve studied?
Indeed, not all attempts to erase a culture are successful. Individual loyalty to one’s own culture and tradition is hard
to eradicate. Hastiin To’Haali remained at the Carlisle Indian Industrial School as Tom Torlino until August 1886,
when he left and returned both to his childhood lands in New Mexico and to his people’s language, culture and
traditions. Pratt’s attempt to ‘Americanize’ Hastiin To’Haali wasn’t successful: Hastiin To’Haali lived out his life as
a successful rancher and medicine man and only made use of his Carlisle education when asked to write letters in
English or communicate with outsiders (Yurth). Hastiin To’Haali, as an individual, was lucky. The same cannot be
said for his culture or the other Indigenous cultures around the world. Boarding schools like Carlisle had already
been set up in his native lands and the westward expansion of the United States was unrelenting.
In 1868, the Navajo Nation held only 10 per cent of its ancestral homeland, first taken by Mexican expansion, then
later US expansion, though much of this has been reacquired (Birchfield). The 1872 census was the first genuine
attempt at identifying the number of ‘Indians’ across the US, counting about 38.5 million (Jobe). By 2010, the
number had dropped to 5.2 million (Norris, et al). There are only about 100 communities considered ‘uncontacted’
in the world today (meaning that they have not yet made any contact with any wider culture), but this number is
destined to change in the face of unstoppable globalization (Holmes). Although many Indigenous communities
remain strong and some are even growing, the challenges they face continue to be ever-present.
DEEPER THINKING
Categorization
Much of our knowledge of the world is aimed at categorizing different things into various groups with
others that share similar features. Creating these categories and using them to describe objects is a
form of knowledge construction. Are there such things as ‘natural categories’ in the world or do we
create them? In what ways do our own desires and wishes and paradigms dictate how we impose
categories onto the world?
IA prompt
6 How does the way that we organize or classify knowledge affect what we know?
A better option might be to identify a set of overlapping characteristics which different groups that we identify as
‘Indigenous share, but without expecting that there is some single characteristic that they all have in common. This
would be like what twentieth-century philosopher Ludwig Wittgenstein called a ‘family resemblance’. He suggested
that certain concepts do not have one clearly definable definition that can be applied to things in the world. He used
the concept of games as an example, suggesting that the things we call ‘games’ are all similar, but that there is no
single feature common to them all, like the way members of families resemble one another without having a single
defining feature (Wittgenstein). Think of your own family – you might look a bit like your parents and your siblings,
but there is probably not a single characteristic that you all have in common.
This might be a more fruitful way of defining ‘Indigenous’. There might be common characteristics which generally
capture what we think the term should mean. Starting with the acceptance that there are communities of people
around the world (the UN has counted them!) to whom we think the term ‘Indigenous’ applies, we may then explore
ways in which they resemble one another, even if we accept that each may have unique characteristics which are
Cultural assumptions
In addition to the attempt to find a working definition of ‘Indigenous’ described here, there are further questions
about the politics of making such a distinction. You may have already recognized the problem we’re facing when
reading about Pratt’s goals for the Carlisle School. It’s pretty clear in his quotations on pages 148 and 149 that,
while we might recognize that, from his point of view, he was trying to help the Indigenous students at his school,
he nevertheless saw them and their culture as ‘primitive’, even calling them ‘savage’. Perhaps it can be argued that
Pratt was a product of his time and that his own cultural assumptions made it impossible for him to accept that a
culture so different from his own (and one that that had been happily living on its own for thousands of years).
However, his cultural assumptions about the Native Americans nevertheless pose a real problem and are likely to
render anything Pratt says or does as irretrievably prejudiced and bigoted. The question of how to responsibly define
and then responsibly reflect on Indigenous knowledge systems in the context of a wider dominating society is
contentious and explored more fully in the Ethics section of this chapter. We as writers are aware of this problem,
conscious as we are that we are not part of any Indigenous community. We make an attempt to define and reflect on
Indigenous knowledge systems, though, in the hopes that we can learn about these communities and reflect on our
own cultural perspectives.
TOK trap
One of the key points of the Theory of Knowledge course is that each of us views the world from a
perspective or through the lens of the beliefs and culture we are part of. It is a bit like viewing the world
through a set of spectacles, but not realizing that you’re wearing them.
Recognizing the impact of these background beliefs, expectations and paradigms is a challenge. This
often impacts TOK students’ work in two ways. Firstly, students very quickly think that they understand
or can speak about another culture to which they do not belong. More often than not, it is obvious to a
reader of the student’s work (your teachers and your examiners will spot it a mile away). Secondly,
students (but not just students!) can too easily judge the world from their own perspective (and
unconsciously believe that perspective to be the ‘right’ perspective). It is very easy and all too natural to
judge other cultures negatively, especially when they present ideas and behaviours which are not part of
your own culture.
This is not to suggest that a genuine critical reflection on another culture’s behaviour is not appropriate
and sometimes needed. However, take care not to assume from the outset that just because you are
unfamiliar with a practice or belief from another culture it is therefore not as good as your own, or that it
is in some way ‘wrong’. To conclude that some other culture’s behaviour is mistaken or wrong takes a
fair bit of charitable understanding and argument. To ‘pre-judge’ another culture’s behaviours or beliefs
is just a sign of prejudice.
None of this is to suggest that a working definition of ‘Indigenous’ isn’t possible or important to construct.
Identifying what we mean by Indigenous will help us to both understand the perspective of these communities as
well as understand and help to combat the challenges they might face.
Accepting that such definitions are contentious, the UN has avoided adopting any ‘official’ definition, but it has
offered a number of concepts which might serve as distinguishing features of these communities. Some
distinguishing features include:
• Having historical and pre-colonial or pre-settler connections to a specific geographical region and having distinct
linguistic, social, economic or political systems from the more dominant culture surrounding them. Being a ‘non-
dominant’ community is meant to bring out the fact that in many cases Indigenous cultures are those cultures who
have suffered the worst consequences of colonial expansion: it was generally their lands which were colonized by
more economically and militarily powerful cultures and it is Indigenous cultures which have found their way of
life threatened.
• Self-identification of members into that community and the acceptance by the community of that individual. In
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
In what ways do different AOKs and communities of knowers create structures which make their
knowledge different from others?
One of the features of knowledge systems we are considering here, as opposed to the AOKs, is that both Indigenous
knowledge and religious knowledge are far more absolute than the knowledge of the AOKs and they impose a far
greater influence on the individual. Knowledge in the areas of knowledge might be seen as in a state of flux, with
knowledge changing over time with new evidence and discoveries, whereas one of the features of Indigenous and
religious systems is that they are relatively closed. This is because in many respects they hold and confer cultural
knowledge which people identify with, so an individual’s relationship to that knowledge is different. The intellectual
tradition from which the International Baccalaureate has emerged, for example, starts with the assumption that
knowledge is a sort of commodity that we gain, trade, construct and sometimes overturn. But knowledge in
Indigenous cultures is intimately related to an individual’s sense of identity. Being part of an Indigenous community
means holding on to knowledge as part of your core. This is the tragedy of the decline of Indigenous knowledge:
peoples’ identities are being lost as well. We will consider this more in terms of language later.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Explanation
We saw in Chapter 1 that an explanation is a description of some thing, system or phenomenon. But
beyond simply describing, an explanation accounts for why the thing is the way it is or what it does or
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
what it’s good for. What concepts and language are used in those explanations, however, isn’t
immediately obvious and may be different depending on the communities of knowers giving the
explanation. In the case of Indigenous knowledge systems, the sorts of phenomena being explained will
incorporate the types of objects these communities experience in the world, which we will see can
incorporate spirits like myths, visions or rituals that science wouldn’t accept as real. The methods used
to explain such spirits and their interaction with the world will require different methods than those used
in scientific explanation.
IA prompt
32 What makes a good explanation?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does our culture determine what we know?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How might our approach to understanding the natural world influence the way we engage with it?
This approach emphasizes the Indigenous belief shared by many communities that we human beings are fully
embedded in the world we are trying to describe; but we are not simply an object to study, we are part of an
interrelated social environment. Describing how the world is, is partly describing the desires, motives and purpose of
the beings in the natural forces we see (Kidwell 212).
What then are we to say about these two perspectives? One in which the world is fully explained through a
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
description of the natural laws and impersonal forces as if the world is a big and complex machine, the other in
which we describe the world in terms of spirits and unseen beings (or beings ‘seen’ through the wind and the
seasons changing and in the movement of rivers)? EA Burtt, a philosopher of science writing in 1932, suggested that
perhaps there’s nothing in the world which will make this decision for us, but rather something in us which compels
us to choose one over another (Kidwell 212).
Some might argue that the paradigm in which we are separate from the world, where understanding the world
requires us to step back from it and construct knowledge of the natural forces so we can harness and exploit those
forces and resources, has led us to the brink of disaster. Our track record in maintaining a healthy respect of the
limited resources of the world and promoting a healthy environment is not very good. Might this be because our
paradigm ignores our personal relationships to the world?
One interesting practical outcome is to think about the differences on how we characterize the threat of climate
change.
The way that many Indigenous cultures relate to the land itself has come into conflict with other notions of
‘ownership’. In the eighteenth century, philosopher John Locke emerged as one of the heroes of the Enlightenment
because he wrote convincingly about the basic human rights individuals have in relation to their government.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do the natural sciences provide a more effective way to understand and engage with climate change
than Indigenous traditions? Are Indigenous traditions incompatible with an understanding of the natural
world provided by the natural sciences?
Locke argued specifically for an understanding of ‘ownership’ that placed the emphasis on the labour of individuals.
If a person worked the land, this would be the basis of his or her claim to ‘own’ it. ‘Working the land’ meant things
like farming, mining, building or otherwise transforming the land into something that the owner desired. Having put
that work into the land, kings and queens therefore, could not morally take that land away. When the Europeans
transported this view of land ownership to the New World of the Americas (and we can see the same thing
happening wherever the Europeans sailed to) they found land devoid of any recognizable ‘labour’. They found
virgin forests, untilled land and pristine empty lands wherever they looked. In many cases, the people they did find
(the great cities and civilizations of Meso-America excluded of course) were mobile, following game and the
seasons.
… tis labour indeed that puts the difference of value on every thing; and let any one consider, what the
difference is between an acre of land planted with tobacco, or sugar, sown with wheat or barley; and an
acre of the same land lying in common, without husbandry upon it, and he will find, that the improvement
of labour makes the far greater part of the value. (John Locke, Second Treatise on Government Book II,
Chapter 5, section 40)
CASE STUDY
Marovo Lagoon
The Solomon Islands are found about 2000 km north of Brisbane, Australia, and are so named because
when Spanish explorers found gold there in the sixteenth century, they believed it to be home to the
fabled King Solomon’s mines. (King Solomon was said to be an exceedingly rich king of Israel who
reigned in the tenth century BCE. The source of his wealth was a matter of mystery and explorers,
motivated by greed, did their best to find it.)
The Solomon Islands have been the focus of colonizing attempts by Spain, The Netherlands, France
and Britain. The islands gained independence in 1976. Marovo Lagoon, one of the world’s largest coral
ACTIVITY
Use the QR code to view the UNESCO study guide Reef and Rainforest: An Environmental
Encyclopedia of Marovo Lagoon.
1 What do you think is the effect of the students learning science through direct reference to the local
environment, engaging with the local villagers (who may not be teachers) and communicating and
writing assignments in the local language?
2 How might this benefit the Indigenous population and contribute to the Marovo Indigenous knowledge
system?
3 Are there ways that this might be limiting?
4 Are there benefits of learning science in this way that could not be achieved were the instruction to be
given entirely in the dominant language of English?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Responsibility
In Chapter 1 we discussed the relationship between knowledge and responsibility. This responsibility
can be thought of as being written into the very understanding of the world. In many Indigenous
knowledge systems, the individual’s place in the environment is characterized as a relationship between
conscious beings. This immediately creates an ethical commitment between the individual and the world
around them, which is analogous to our ethical commitments to people around us. In some cases, we
are directly responsible for promoting the well-being of people (like our friends and family) and in other
cases we are minimally responsible for not damaging others’ well-being (like strangers around us).
ACTIVITY
Consider the various ‘Principles of Learning’ listed on the poster and discuss what you think this tells you
about the nature of Indigenous knowledge systems.
Imagine, however, if your government officially mandated that you should not speak your mother tongue or follow
your cultural traditions. Indigenous peoples all over the world have suffered this fate. Under the belief that
Indigenous cultures were doomed to fade away, many governments, in a supposed attempt to look after the welfare
of Indigenous people, forced a programme of ‘assimilation’ on members of Indigenous communities.
The United States Civilization Fund Act of 1819 and the Japanese Former Natives Protection Law of 1899 are two
examples where it was assumed that the native populations were destined to disappear, so to help the remaining
members of the communities, their children were forced into boarding schools, their land was taken and distributed
to the wider community and their cultural traditions outlawed. The goal was to remove any distinction between
Indigenous and non-Indigenous peoples, except that the only ones to lose out were the Indigenous peoples.
Even while many of these laws have been repealed and countries all over the world are now trying to foster the
The UN estimates that there are 2680 Indigenous languages at danger of being lost, and declared 2019 the
international year of Indigenous languages, to bring this to the attention of the world. The potential loss of a
community’s language represents the loss of that community’s identity.
For example, look at this quotation from Minnie Degawan, Director of the Indigenous and Traditional Peoples
Program at Conservation International:
In my community, the Kankanaey Igorot [an Indigenous group living in the Cordillera region of the
Philippines], we have the concept of inayan, which basically prescribes the proper behaviour in various
circumstances. It encapsulates the relationship of the individual to the community and to the ancestors. It
goes beyond simply saying ‘be good’; it carries the admonition that ‘the spirits/ancestors will not
approve’. Because many of the young people now no longer speak the local language and use English or
the national language instead, this notion and value is being lost. The lack of dialogue between elders and
the youth is exacting a toll, not just in terms of language but in ancestral ethical principles. (Degawan)
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
In what ways does the loss of Indigenous languages signify a loss of knowledge and cultural diversity?
In cases where the culture’s language is spoken at home but the dominant language is taught as the only language at
school, the dominant language and its culture comes to be seen as the culture that students should be learning, that in
the public world the ‘right’ language is the language of the dominant culture. This message, then, reinforces the
belief that their own native culture is not as important.
CASE STUDY
The Mayangna, Nicaragua
Francisco Miguel Castro, a bilingual language teacher in Nicaragua and member of the Indigenous
Mayangna people, says that learning their own community’s language is important because students
‘have more freedom to express their knowledge, what they observe, their reality, and moreover, they
have a greater sense of pride – that they are part of a language that is their own language, and they now
feel they have the same rights as other nations’ (UNESCO 2017a). For example, the Mayangna people
have been living in the forests of Nicaragua for centuries and have developed a thorough knowledge of
the plants and animals in the area and of how to live harmoniously with those plants and animals. The
gold mining and cattle industry is now threatening their homeland forests, but the education system
(which was conducted entirely in Spanish) didn’t engage directly with this threat. The Spanish language
instruction was not related to them at all and didn’t have any connection to the perils of their local
forests.
In 2010, a new initiative was launched to teach the students primarily in their native language with
Spanish taught as a second language, meaning that the language was taught through the lens of the
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
immediate needs of the community. Students were able to learn the knowledge of their community first,
including the local fish and turtle species which traditionally have been a major food source, but which
have been threatened by the loss of local habitat. Learning in their own language has given them access
to the relevant knowledge and concepts which will empower them to use that knowledge to protect their
land and their culture.
ACTIVITY
Consider your own school’s curricula – or the choices that your school makes in terms of IB options.
1 What are the messages being sent?
2 What values are demonstrated by those choices?
3 What other choices are available and how might they have suggested different values?
Critically reflecting on your curriculum in other contexts provides good TOK insights: we will do this in
relation to history in Chapter 11.
As a TOK student, you will be aware of how different languages pose genuine problems for translation. It is not
always the case that a concept which is captured by a word in one language can easily be translated into another
language. This issue also comes up when working with Indigenous cultures whose background and linguistic
evolution might be entirely different to any of the ‘modern’ languages used by the non-Indigenous populations of
the world. Sometimes this unique linguistic evolution has interesting consequences which illustrates on one hand the
biological, similarities between all humans, and the deep cultural differences between us on the other. These cultural
differences in language seem to have a deep effect on how we perceive the world, how we actually see the world.
Learner profile
Communicators
How does knowing about another’s culture help you communicate with them more effectively?
For instance, the colour terms available to different cultures in their respective languages show how important
language is when describing what we normally consider objective facts. Comparisons between the use of colour
terms between cultures show that toddlers who do not yet speak their culture’s language are equally good at
distinguishing between the whole range of colours, suggesting that biologically, human beings are born equally
skilled at perceiving colour. Once children learn their language, however, an interesting phenomenon occurs; we
seem to lose the ability to make certain colour distinctions that speakers from other linguistic traditions can easily
make.
Research has shown that the ability to distinguish certain colours varies between English speakers and those in the
Berinmo culture of Papua New Guinea and the Himba culture of northern Namibia. Whereas English speakers use
many colour terms, the Himba and Berinmo cultures use only five, which means that English speakers will
categorize the colours they see under very different headings to members of these Indigenous cultures. The effect of
this is that when one language doesn’t discriminate between subtle differences in the hues of colour, that is, when
the same colour term is used for different hues, the speaker of that language struggles to identify the difference.
Berinmo speakers similarly struggled to see the difference between certain shades of blue-green that English
speakers have no problems with at all, because English uses different words to capture the difference: ‘blue’ and
‘green’. In the Berinmo language the same word applies to both colours. However, the inverse is also true; despite
having more colour categories, English speakers struggled to distinguish between what the Berinmo easily
distinguish and use different terms for: ‘nol’ and ‘wor’. With these colour terms they are able to spot differences
immediately where English speakers cannot (Davidov, et al and Bornstein).
What this suggests is that the influence of culture and language on how we describe and articulate what we can see
has huge ramifications for what we claim to be real features of the world. The Himba people cannot deny that they
see a clear difference between a ‘dumbu’ square and a ‘serandu’ square, even if English speakers simply cannot see
it.
This example also emphasizes the point that to genuinely understand the world from another culture’s perspective
we would need to have a thorough understanding of that culture’s language. Learning the Himba or Berinmo colour
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
words, however, might not be enough if we cannot apply them meaningfully, and this might not be possible without
actually living with or even growing up in that culture. They have spent their whole life applying their colour
concepts in a way that someone stepping into that language might not be able to do.
IA prompt
10 What challenges are raised by the dissemination and/or communication of knowledge?
CASE STUDY
Rapa Nui
Rapa Nui – also known as Isla de Pascua or Easter Island – is an island in the South Pacific, 3600 km
west of Chile. It was annexed by Chile in 1888. It is believed that the first inhabitants arrived there in the
thirteenth century from the surrounding Polynesian islands (although the nearest island is still over 2000
km away). The Rapa Nui culture is famous for producing the nearly 1000 moai statues. UNESCO
designated the entire island a World Heritage site in 2015. Today, nearly 8000 people live on the island,
of whom 3512 consider themselves part of the Indigenous Rapa Nui community.
In 2016, the Chilean government and UNESCO surveyed the status of the native Rapa Nui language
speakers, finding that over 70 per cent of people over 60 speak the native language, but this drops to
half of all speakers over the age of 40, and it drops again to barely one third of the population in the 20–
39 age range (UNESCO 2017b). The vast majority of these young adults do not pass on the native
language to their children, instead opting for the dominant culture’s language, Spanish. Only 10 per cent
of school children today speak their culture’s native language, down from 23 per cent in 1997 (Sopova
and Ortega). The language is dying:
‘If there are no children who speak our language, and we as adults die, when these children are
adults and become parents, they won’t speak the language and will not be able to teach it to
their children’, laments Vicky Haoa, member of the Rapa Nui Language Academy. She dreams
‘that my language will not disappear, because language is part of our way of being, of our
thoughts, our feelings, our joys and much more. If our language disappears, one cannot speak
of the existence of a culture called Rapa Nui. We show who we are through our language’.
(UNESCO 2017b)
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What is the role of rituals in acquiring and sharing knowledge?
‘Knowledge’ in this very familiar picture takes the form of ideas and beliefs which we examine, consider, test and
then ultimately accept or not. If accepted, we store this knowledge in our minds and use it to help make sense of
other ideas later. Many of the methods we employ in our areas of knowledge suggest then that we should remain
open to testing those beliefs to make sure they are still justified according to the evidence we continue to gather.
Our exploration of Indigenous knowledge systems opens up new ways of thinking about how knowledge is
conveyed and how we relate to that knowledge once we’ve accepted it. One method by which communities ensure
that knowledge is passed on to individuals is through ritual. Rituals are used in all sorts of societies and
communities as a way of passing on knowledge and an exploration of this method highlights two important elements
of knowledge in these communities.
• Firstly, the knowledge and beliefs conveyed through ritual are embedded in a way that is different from the way
knowledge is ‘held’ when it is passed on through books and teachers. Often, the knowledge gained through rituals
becomes part of the non-conscious, pre-reflective attitudes and dispositions of the knower, rather than being
something that the knower has considered and tested and accepted. Very often, the beliefs gained through ritual
are far stronger than beliefs we accept and sometimes we are not fully aware that we have these embedded beliefs.
This sort of knowledge can of course be developed in ways other than ritual, but one of the points of ritual is to
change the knower in a far deeper way than what can be characterized as ‘teaching’ or ‘learning’.
• Secondly, we might suggest that there are certain types of knowledge that might need to be conveyed in other,
more subtle, ways than the traditional learning occurring in classrooms and libraries. Some knowledge helps bind
communities together, individuals to individuals, and Indigenous societies are often bound together in a way that
is far more interdependent and communal than thinking about these communities merely as ‘cultures’ might
suggest. We might, for instance, suggest that there is a North American or European ‘culture’, a way of living
which has broad similarities across the region, but those similarities don’t bind individuals to each other or to the
local community in a way that is nearly as strong as what is often seen in Indigenous cultures.
Being part of an Indigenous culture is to be, to exist, in the world in a certain way. A way which sometimes is not
learned through books and lectures, but through other avenues such as participating in rituals or exploring myths.
Rituals are things people do but they are also a way of aligning one’s personal knowledge and experience to the
community’s. Some of the knowledge which binds those communal communities is not something learned in the
classroom or through books; it needs to be far stronger than that and ritual might be the best way for an individual to
accept and embed that knowledge.
What is a ritual?
Ritual is not habitual behaviour. You might have a morning ritual in which you do things the same way and in the
same order. You might brush your teeth in a particular way, then lay out your clothes for the day in a certain way,
then set up and eat your breakfast in a particular way and even make your way to school in a particular way.
Repetitive behaviour is often called ‘ritual’, but there is a more profound meaning related to knowing.
One way to understand this difference is to think about something which looks like a ritual but isn’t. Suppose, for
instance, that you are acting in a school play in which you are expected to take part in a wedding. This is not a real
wedding. You might undergo exactly the same actions and you might even say exactly the same things, but taking
part in the genuine ritual imposes a new status upon you; you end up in quite a different situation than when you
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
started or you have, through the ritual, renewed the status that you’re aiming for. The difference between play-acting
and a genuine ritual, then, is that the individuals involved (both those participating in the ritual and those attending
the ritual), change during the process. Getting married, for instance, obviously means that the participants have
entered into a new relationship, but also that the community recognizes that new relationship. Everyone, in effect,
has changed.
CASE STUDY
Sateré-Mawé initiation rites
One example of such a ritual in the context of an Indigenous community comes from the Sateré-Mawé
initiation rites. This Amazonian rainforest tribe uses a ritual designed to initiate young men into adulthood
in which the men place their hands into specially designed gloves which hold hundreds of bullet ants.
The stings of these ants are thought to be the most painful sting in the animal kingdom. Having
undergone this ritual successfully, the young man is thus entitled to the rights and privileges of
adulthood, including marriage and joining warriors and hunters. For the Sateré-Mawé men, however, it
seems that once is not enough: the men will undergo this ritual a number of times throughout their life,
each time renewing their status as a warrior in the group. The first QR code below will enable you to
watch a National Geographic video of this ritual. The second QR code provides more information about
the ritual.
How is this particular ritual related to knowledge? In Singapore, children become ‘adults’ at the age of
21, and we know this because of a law (‘Children and Young Persons Act’). All countries will have these
legal definitions of adults and when the conditions relate to age, the individual becomes a legal adult at
the stroke of midnight.
People in the Sateré-Mawé community, however, use the ritual mentioned above not simply as a way of
telling others that these men have become adults but as a means also of justifying that knowledge.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Undergoing that ritual creates the conditions on which the knowledge that the child has become an adult
can be established. While an individual might undergo all sorts of painful and frightening experiences
during their adolescence, these experiences are not what ‘turns’ the boy into the adult. The community
has established a particular event and it is this event, not any other, by which the truth of the claim, ‘you
are an adult’ is established.
One definition of ritual highlights the fact that rituals are a form of communication. Ritual scholar Roy Rappaport
defines ritual as ‘the performance of more or less invariant sequences of formal acts and utterances not encoded by
the performers’ (Rappaport 175). The idea here is that through ritual, messages or knowledge are communicated
from the culture to the performers of the ritual. When he says ‘utterances not encoded by the performers’, Rappaport
is pointing out that rituals are one way that the shared knowledge and cultural information of the community is
passed on to individuals in that community. The performers do not themselves determine the meaning (encode) of
the ritual, they participate in that meaning. He says that ‘participants transmit information concerning their own
current physical, psychic, or sometimes social status to themselves and to other participants’ (Rappaport 179). This
information is meaningful only in the context of the shared beliefs and knowledge of the wider community. This is
why sometimes when we watch the behaviour of people from other cultures, particularly when watching rituals, we
find it difficult to make sense of what they are doing. Without being part of the culture and understanding the
context, the rituals might not make sense, but participating in the ritual over and over again is one way for an
individual to come to understand that culture.
Rappaport describes several key characteristics of ritual, including:
• formality – actions which are abstract and divorced from everyday activity
• repetitiveness – they happen again and again, the same way each time without alteration
• effectiveness – participating in a ritual creates a change in you and your status in society and among other people
• earnestness – participating in ritual is far more than just ‘going through the motions’.
A ritual’s formality refers to the processes and actions involved. They are purposefully not part of the normal
everyday range of behaviours. This ‘formality’ is meant to indicate that something special is happening and the
formality of the event underscores an important point: that the events of the ritual are each important and any
deviation from the ritual will mean that it is not effective. If the Sateré-Mawé boys, for instance, show too much
emotion or throw the gloves off before the time is up, then the ritual has not been effective, and they are not
considered ‘men’. Similarly, in the wedding ceremony, if the people getting married don’t, for example, exchange
their vows in the presence of someone who has been given the responsibility of officiating, then all the vowing in
the world won’t necessarily mean that they have been successful in getting married.
The formal actions of a ritual can change over time and in different contexts. There are as many different wedding
ceremonies as there are cultures, but this is part of the point of ritual. That the participants and observers have
chosen a particular set of formal actions is partly what binds them together.
The effectiveness and earnestness of rituals underscores the idea that rituals are designed to create new states for the
individuals or to maintain the normal state of things. Rituals are effective in that they initiate and implement change
(often an individual moving from one stage of life to another) but they also maintain the status quo – how things
need to be.
Rituals protect communities and their cultural knowledge in that they unite the communities under a single
unchanging vision and single framework to understand the world. Each of the elements listed above is crucial in
maintaining a ritual’s effectiveness: in maintaining a clear statement of that shared knowledge, for passing that
knowledge on to individuals and perhaps most importantly, for individuals to communicate to themselves and to
others that they accept this cultural knowledge. Participating in that ritual, time and time again, and knowing that
others in the culture, including your ancestors, have participated in the ritual embeds the knowledge being
communicated ‘into’ the individual. In this case, seeing the Sun rise from the island at the solstice, and being part of
a ritual where that observation is given a meaning in the context of the whole-world view of the culture, will make
that knowledge true in a significant way.
CASE STUDY
The Island of the Sun, Lake Titicaca
For this reason, participants take rituals very seriously because they recognize that their actions are what is important
to maintain how things need to be. The Sateré-Mawé boys take their initiation rites seriously, not just because it is
horrifically painful, but because without it they cannot consider themselves or be considered full adult members of
the society. One can imagine a boy allowing himself to be stung beforehand to test how painful it will be, but this
practice would never be thought of as the ritual itself. Rehearsing the ritual is not the same as undergoing it.
Similarly, the Inca priesthood on the Island of the Sun must also take their job seriously as it is partly the rituals and
the worship that cause the regularity of the Sun’s procession through the sky.
Rituals are also generally repetitive, in the sense that different individuals will undergo the same ritual repeated each
time it’s needed, or that individuals will undergo the same ritual again and again when it is needed. This is one of
the most important elements of how rituals embed knowledge more deeply than perhaps simply learning some fact
would.
Rituals are essentially about the messages and perspectives shared by communities being renewed in the minds of
individuals. They embed knowledge in a way that is hard to drive out. Consider the following quote from a member
of the Yup’ik tribe in western Alaska:
There is a very close connection between the animal world and human world. We believe that humans and
animals communicate through Ellam Yua, and that these relationships are governed by rules. For each
different type of food, there are rules that men and women must follow to take care of it. If the rule is not
followed for that particular animal, then that food source will either become scarce or disappear entirely,
depending on the intensity of the violation. If the rules were followed carefully and the animal spirit was
pleased for example, with the way that the weapons were handled after it was caught, or the way that it
was cared for and eaten, then the food source would multiply and the hunter would be blessed with more
to catch. Subsistence required good relationships between humans and animals and maintaining this
One of the authors of this book had an experience which brought this point about the power of belief
given to us by ritual into sharp relief. While living in England during the 2012 Olympics (when it was held
in London) and after the Olympics were over, he noticed that many of the little plastic United Kingdom
flags that only days earlier had been displayed in shop windows, in front of houses and other places, had
suddenly found their way into rubbish bins and sometimes just lay on the pavement. As a US citizen
who, for his entire school education, said the Pledge of Allegiance every morning and been deeply
impressed by the reverence given to the flag, he suddenly noticed that he felt if he were to come across
a US flag, plastic or otherwise, he simply could not leave it lying there. The ritualized pledging he
participated in every morning had inculcated a belief that the flag was of special significance. Other flag-
related rituals, like the proper folding of it, the lowering of it to half-mast or the proper disposal of it are
natural outcomes of the belief that it is a genuine symbol of great importance, all encoded through daily
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
rituals in which he verbally and physically showed its importance. That ritual was utterly successful; that
belief remains even 30 years after he last pledged allegiance to any flag.
There are other examples of ritual all around us. In some schools, students stand when teachers walk
into the room to inculcate the belief that respect to teachers is due (a crucial belief in education).
Militaries have intense initiation periods (‘boot camps’) in which a soldier’s beliefs about individuality are
reconstructed to prioritize the group (a crucial belief in battle). This sort of knowledge is deeply personal,
and it has a unique relation to the shared knowledge of the community.
ACTIVITY
Think about rituals that have impacted your life. They may be religious, cultural, political or social.
1 Can you identify the beliefs that are encoded in that ritual?
2 How has that belief impacted your life?
3 Could that belief, or the knowing of it or having of it, be given in some other way? Why or why not?
4 Research a ritual in an Indigenous culture (it might be your own).
5 Present the elements of the ritual and explain the beliefs that are passed on by participating.
6 Discuss whether you think that this knowledge or these beliefs can be passed on through other
means.
CASE STUDY
Kaluli creation myth
The creation myth of the Kaluli people of central Papua New Guinea (who are generally non-literate)
starts with a completely formless land, populated with people, who quickly become cold and hungry.
From within the ranks comes one person who gathers the people together and begins assigning them
various roles in the natural world, from streams and rivers, to plants, trees and animals. The people left
over after this dividing are the ancestors of the humans living today.
This myth, which may be considered ‘true’ by the individuals in the community, teaches an important
point, that the human beings of the tribe are no different than anything around them, as everything is
essentially the same, just taking on a different form. Thus, the myth teaches that humans are not ‘other’
than the world around them (Schieffelin 93–94).
Interestingly, the fact that the Kaluli people are non-literate underscores the importance of myths in the
community – without the intuitive and relatable myths, the knowledge of their relationship to the world
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
would disappear.
CASE STUDY
Sámi people, Finland
In the Sámi culture of northern Finland, another sort of myth is told, this time underscoring how
sometimes myths give us a way of understanding particular events. In this instance, it is the return of the
Sun, and how, things might not end up working the same as they’ve worked before (thereby
emphasizing the role of ritual in maintaining how things are).
In this account, based on a fragment of a poem called ‘The Death of Sun’s Daughter’, the title character
lies close to death yet yearns to see her father one last time. He has gone beyond the horizon and has
yet to rise again. She laments that ‘the herd shrinks, the pest rages, insects torment, Children grope
about in the dark’ (Kárrái/Thomas). With her final breath she begs her father to rise again and return the
world to light.
Here we see an understanding of the world that is deeply dangerous and frightening. In the homelands
of the far north, where the Sámi live, the Sun can disappear for months on end (depending on how far
north you live). The understanding captured in this myth provides a personal connection to the darkness
of the winter but doesn’t hide the fact that the Sun’s disappearance is a genuine threat and needs to be
taken seriously. The Sun might not return so one must take care to work to maintain the safety of the
community in light of this fact. So, whether or not people genuinely believe this story to describe what
happens every winter, it provides the knowledge needed to act accordingly.
Not all Indigenous myths are aimed at telling the origins of the cosmos or cosmological events; some are
more limited, but these do not have any less impact on teaching the individual about his relationship to
the world. Like many Indigenous cultures, the Sámi understand the natural landscape to be full of
magical spirits who govern all sorts of aspects of their lives, from the migration of reindeer, to the
success of hunters and fishermen. They have identified seidas in the landscape (natural formations
which stood out from their surroundings, like rocky outcrops in a flat landscape or a grove of trees in an
otherwise barren plain) and believe them to hold these spirits. The people used ritual to engage with
these spirits and would reward the spirits with offerings if they helped the people, perhaps through a
successful hunt. Interestingly the spirits would sometimes be punished or abandoned if the Sámi felt that
the spirits didn’t help enough. One story told is as follows:
A man from Teno caught some trout by his dam and gave some to the seida. But, as it
happened, there was no bounty for the next few days. The man got mad and went to beat his
god with birch twigs, jeering:
‘You are no god!
I’ve anointed you with oils,
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
but you will not give me fish.’
When the fisherman went back to his fishing dam, a gust of wind threw his boat over and he
nearly drowned. Frightened, he crawled back to the rock to ask that it not be angry anymore.
(‘The Sámi World View and Mythology’)
In non-Indigenous cultures this might be seen as simply a story with meaning, but in the mythological
language this is a story which underscores a number of important truths:
• Firstly, that the Sámi people and the spirits of the land live in a close harmony, where the resources of
the land are not simply assumed to be had for the taking. Scarcity is a real feature of living in a harsh
climate and the world’s resources and goods should not be taken for granted.
• Secondly, the myth teaches that human beings work in harmony with these spirits; humans are tied to
the natural world in a deep and interrelated way. Finally, these spirits must be respected even when
they do not provide.
Sámi do accept that sometimes the spirits do not or cannot provide and their seidas are sometimes
abandoned for new ones, but even in these cases the Sámi learn through these stories that respect
must nevertheless be shown.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Explanation
As discussed previously, explanations both describe events and try to offer reasons why those events
are the way that they are. The role of myths in Indigenous knowledge systems are no different; they
provide a description of events and of reasons why things are the way that they are. However, those
reasons are not characterized by impersonal physical forces, but by personal motives and intentions that
can be engaged with by the community through ritual.
One difference with myths as explanations, however, is that we have to keep in mind what is actually
being explained. Like when we discussed maps and their explanatory power, we must understand what
sort of phenomenon or event is being explained. The story about the death of the Sun’s daughter doesn’t
explain the physics behind the Sun’s yearly movement through the sky; rather, it explains the motives
and intentions of the forces at work. The explanation thus provided creates a relation to that event; it
turns the listener into a participant in the movement of the Sun rather than simply a far-off and
unconnected observer.
DEEPER THINKING
Myth and climate change
Consider the current climate crisis.
• How do you think an explanation of the natural features of the world, which incorporates personal
spirits and beings within the landscape, might alter how you characterize the crisis?
• How do you think describing the resources of the world as impersonal objects to be exploited, or how
an explanation of the world which actively attempts to break the connection between our personal
views and our descriptions of the world, might have contributed to the crisis in the first place?
• If an explanation of the crisis using mythological language provides the motive to change our
behaviour in relation to the environment, does it matter whether a scientific perspective might disagree
with it?
• What role could a scientific view of the environment and the facts about climate change play in relation
to such a mythological explanation?
ACTIVITY
Find a ‘creation myth’ or ‘creation account’ prominent in an Indigenous culture. Get into small groups and
read about it. Discuss what you found out and answer the following questions:
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
1 What knowledge is being conveyed?
2 Is it simply historical or scientific, or does it contain beliefs and knowledge about how individuals in
that community relate to the world?
3 How do you think this knowledge would aid a person from that community?
4 In what ways do the non-literal elements of the myths help in developing understanding?
5 Does the notion of truth take on a different aspect here?
Now compare your ideas with another group’s responses:
6 How are they different?
7 What about the students in the group – do you think the cultural background of the group might
account for these differences?
8 Does it make sense to suggest that some interpretations are better than others?
9 How do you think a person from that culture would approach the myth?
10 What other cultural elements are needed for the myth to ‘make sense’?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What methods have Indigenous peoples developed to support the recording, preservation and protection
of their traditional knowledge?
Extended Essay
If you’re interested in the nature or function of myths, you might consider exploring this in the context of
an extended essay. The World Studies essay asks students to combine the approach of two disciplines
in the attempt to answer a single research question. In this case you could use World Religions, Social
and Cultural Anthropology, Philosophy or even Group 1 Literature to explore the nature, use and
function of myths and mythology.
An implication of this discussion then leads us to a fundamental worry in discussing myths and Indigenous cultures
more widely: can we genuinely understand the value and function of mythological explanations from outside the
CASE STUDY
The Lakota people and Sitting Bull
In the Lakota people’s traditions, visions are an integral part of the life of an individual. The culture is not
set up around a set number of beliefs which all people have to believe, so the life of the individual and
his or her understanding of the world is largely left up to them.
Visions, for the Lakota men, were a generally accepted part of life, and young men would seek out
visions hoping to see something significant which might shed light on how to live their life (Martínez 82).
Because there was no specified set of religious dogma in Native American spirituality, each man would
formulate his own system and individuals would accept others at their word that they had been told what
they said they had been told. Lakota ‘medicine-men’, the spiritual leaders, would have visions which
helped them cure the sick, locate hidden articles, predict future events, or assist hunters by coaxing
buffalo near (Martínez 83).
‘Fundamental to the visionary experience is crossing a critical threshold from the explicit world of the
everyday to the implicit reality of the visionary world’ (Martínez 90). As discussed, one of the main
characteristics of many Indigenous knowledge systems is the connection between the secular (or
‘everyday’) and the sacred (or ‘visionary world’). Visions, then, are a full breakdown of this distinction,
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
where the sacred becomes a genuine experience to the individual. They were often accompanied by
long and arduous rituals beforehand, which could include self-inflicted physical wounds, fasting,
incredibly exhausting and dangerous physical exertions and exposure to the elements. The lucky few,
however, would be given a vision, which was not always comfortable.
Sounds came to me through the darkness; the cries of the wind, the whisper of the trees, the
voices of nature, animal sounds, the hooting of an owl. Suddenly I felt an overwhelming
presence. Down there with me in my cramped hole was a big bird. The pit was only as wide as
myself, and I was a skinny boy, but that huge bird was flying around me as if he had the whole
sky to himself. I could hear his cries, sometimes near and sometimes far, far away. I felt
feathers or a wing touching my back and head. This feeling was so overwhelming that it was
just too much for me. I trembled and my bones turned to ice. I grasped the rattle and with the
forty pieces of my grandmother’s flesh…I shook the rattle and it made a soothing sound, like
rain falling on rock. It was talking to me, but it did not calm my fears. I took the sacred pipe in
the other hand and began to sing and pray… But this did not help. I don’t know what got into
me, but I was no longer myself. I started to cry. (Martínez 91)
It was this individualism at the heart of the Sioux nation which historian Stephen E Ambrose suggests is
the root of the relative ease that the European descendants in the young United States were able to
remove the Indigenous populations from their lands. Whereas in the US military, soldiers were
commanded as a unit and were obliged to do what their chain of command told them to, the Sioux
warriors were each free to do what they wished. Building an effective ‘Native Army’, then, could only
have been achieved through the strength, reputation and charisma of its leaders. These leaders did exist
and one was named Sitting Bull.
Sitting Bull was a Hunkpapa Sioux medicine-man (the Sioux are within the same family of tribes as the
Lakota). He was not a warrior but was nevertheless considered one of the bravest the Sioux had to offer.
For example, in 1872, during a standoff with US Cavalry troops, Sitting Bull wanted to raise the spirits of
his warriors, so he calmly took his pipe and wandered out into the no-man’s land between the lines and
in range of the soldiers rifles. He lit his pipe, took a seat and called out to his warriors, ‘Any Indians* who
wish to smoke with me, come on!’ Four other warriors joined him, including a fellow Sioux warrior named
White Bull. White Bull reported that the others smoked as fast as they could while the bullets whined
over their heads and hit the ground all around them, but ‘Sitting Bull was not afraid. He just sat there
quietly, looking around as if he were at home in his tent, and smoked peacefully’ (Ambrose 355).
(*Note that the term ‘Indian’ is used here because this is the term used in Ambrose’s text. It is, of course,
not the term we would use for Native Americans today – who were named this because of Christopher
Columbus’ mistaken belief that he had found a westward route to the trade rich areas of India.)
In 1876, tensions between the warriors of the Sioux and the United States government had come to a
boiling point. During that summer, the US sent a whole army into the lands of the Sioux to drive them all
on to reservations so the US could take full control of the whole continent. Sitting Bull’s Sioux, along with
2000–4000 other warriors, were camped at Rosebud Valley near the Little Bighorn River in what is now
Montana. In an attempt to find out how to proceed and what would happen in the coming battles, Sitting
Bull held a Sun Dance. Surrounded by hundreds of chanting and singing warriors, Sitting Bull followed a
sacred ritual designed to bring on a vision. It required a torturous cutting of his arms and chest, and then,
bleeding profusely, he began a dance, which lasted for 18 hours. When he would faint, others would
splash him with cold water so he could dance some more. Finally, he had his vision: he heard a voice
from above saying, ‘I give you these because they have no ears’, accompanied by a vision of soldiers
and Indian warriors falling from the sky, with their heads down and their hats falling off. ‘They were falling
right into our camp’ (Ambrose 417). This vision was the rallying call that Sitting Bull’s group needed, after
having been chased around the northern plains for months.
ACTIVITY
1 Describe how you think Sitting Bull’s vision, or any other vision, would be treated by Enlightenment
science.
2 How would the science you learn in IB describe such an experience as Sitting Bull’s, its causes and its
content?
3 Knowing what you know about the Indigenous worldview, how do you think someone from the
Indigenous perspective would describe visions? What is their authority in a knowledge system?
4 What function would visions play in the culture?
A ‘scientific’ view of the situation would presumably note Sitting Bull’s vision as simply the result of dehydration,
blood-loss, incredible stress and physical exhaustion. Anyone in that situation, were they strong enough to remain
conscious, would be hallucinating. In terms of content, the psychologists might point out that of course his visions
would be populated with people and events that were on his mind, in a way that our frequent dreams often are about
the events in our lives. These were the objects and ideas that Sitting Bull was most familiar with and had on his
mind, so it comes as no surprise that they are in his visions.
The Indigenous perspective, however, would focus on the authority of such a vision in a description of the world.
Given the basic assumption common to many Indigenous knowledge systems that there is a deep connection
between sacred and secular, a full explanation of the world from such a perspective would require some sort of
access to this sacred realm and visions are ideally suited to this purpose. Furthermore, of course, the visions are of
immediate events and people and this again would be expected in a knowledge system so focused on the immediate
context. The point of Indigenous knowledge is not to know ‘objective’ universal truths but to know about the
immediate world and how to navigate it.
Knowledge is in the service of the immediate here and now; it serves to orientate an individual in his or her world
and explain how the individual relates to their immediate surroundings. As with mythological language, those of us
outside an Indigenous community or those of us who have never had a vision are at something of a disadvantage
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
when trying to understand them. Sitting Bull’s vision, then, held the authority, reliability and credibility others might
give to expert scientists.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
As an ‘outsider’, can we know and speak about the knowledge held by a different cultural group?
A genuine and honest exploration of Indigenous knowledge systems cannot be achieved if the investigation starts
with the assumption that Indigenous communities are less advanced than the colonizing group. If they are looked
down upon as the ‘lesser other’ then they again fall prey to another form of colonization, this time based on
describing them in a certain way, a way which might lead to individuals seeing their own Indigenous communities
as somehow deficient.
If you come from a non-Indigenous culture, then these historical facts must be foremost in your mind as you
consider the TOK issues related to Indigenous knowledge systems. Mischaracterizing them as ‘primitive’ or ‘not
scientific’ is simply to further denigrate them by reapplying the colonial attitudes that Indigenous cultures have tried
to break free from:
The powerful colonial institutions, whether educational, social or economic, have also colonized people’s
minds which has led to internalized colonialism and the acquisitions of … western values, ways of
thinking and world views. In this way, these subtle forms of colonialism have made many Indigenous
individuals devalue their own culture and anything that is connected to it. (Kuokkanen)
IA prompt
14 Does some knowledge belong only to particular communities of knowers?
ACTIVITY
Consider the quotation from Kuokkanen.
1 What does this say about the dangers of trying to develop knowledge of a different culture?
2 Is it possible to fully understand and appreciate the fundamental assumptions and ideas of another
culture?
DEEPER THINKING
What makes knowledge valuable?
While we might accept that there are many different ways of understanding the world, assuming from the
outset that one way is simply better might not make it possible to truly understand the other form. Have
you ever been in a situation where someone has tried to tell you that something you know or value is not
important? What made the other person so sure that their view was the better view? How has authority
Assessment advice
When you choose objects to exhibit in your TOK exhibition assessment, you’ll be looking for items which
are the manifestations of some belief or set of beliefs over and above just what the object is. Many
Indigenous communities create art or artefacts which have a particular meaning to them, one which is
unknowable to others unless they take the time to learn. Even then the significance might not be
understood without being deeply embedded in that community. An object from an Indigenous culture
could be used to explore these issues in the context of one of the TOK IA prompts.
CASE STUDY
Frank Hamilton Cushing and the Zuni People
ACTIVITY
Consider any travelling you might have done to countries, places or even into other communities
unfamiliar to you.
1 What were your initial experiences like? Often these experiences can be quite challenging because
they are so different, and your normal beliefs, reasons and explanations don’t fully apply. However,
the longer you spend in a culture, the more you know about the activities and worldview of that
community, the more you might find that your comfort level changes as well.
2 What knowledge do you have or not have at the beginning of the process?
3 What knowledge do you gain in the process of learning more about the community?
4 Is that propositional or ability knowledge?
5 How does your knowledge of or thoughts about your own culture change as a result of being part of
another culture?
CAS links
If you are part of or live near an Indigenous community, you might consider developing a CAS project
exploring links between your own culture and the nearby dominant or Indigenous culture. Perhaps
children in the non-Indigenous community would benefit from regular links with elders or children in
Indigenous cultures to learn about and help preserve the customs and practices in that Indigenous
community. Students in the non-Indigenous community might report back to their own community about
their experience and encourage mutual understanding.
IA prompt
21 What is the relationship between knowledge and culture?
Learner profile
Balanced
How can we align our religious beliefs with what we learn in other areas of knowledge?
The pie chart does not do justice to the diversity of religious beliefs held by people around the world, however. Most
religions can be divided and subdivided into different branches, denominations or sects, such as Sunni Islam,
Orthodox Judaism or Roman Catholicism. And within these, there will be differing opinions about the
interpretations of sacred texts or the best way to practise religion.
In Theory of Knowledge, however, rather than investigating individual religions’ perspectives, we are exploring
more broadly religious knowledge systems. This means that we’re looking at a type of knowledge and a type of
knowing that is shared among the various religions. This would be a little like considering scientific knowledge
systems as opposed to thinking only of biologists, astronomers, psychologists and geographers; we are looking for
similarities rather than focusing on differences. One way of analysing this idea of religious knowledge systems,
then, is to explore what these ‘religions’ might have in common.
ACTIVITY
1 Working with a partner, write a list of characteristics shared by different religions. Share your ideas
with the rest of your class.
2 Do these shared characteristics help us to define what we mean by religion? What do they tell us
about the relationship between religion and knowledge?
Thinking through these common approaches to religious knowledge is the main goal of this chapter. First, we’ll be
exploring just what the scope of religious knowledge systems is, then exploring some perspectives about the
relationship between religion and knowledge. Then we will be looking at the methods and tools used by religious
knowledge systems and how they differ from non-religious systems of knowledge. Finally, we’ll explore the ethical
dimension of religious knowledge systems.
DEEPER THINKING
Religion and reason
Many TOK students will mistakenly think of religious knowledge systems as being primarily grounded in
something they call ‘faith’, by which they mean something like an uncritical, or unreflective acceptance of
claims where there is no evidence for them, and thereby downplay the role of reason in religious belief.
While for many the starting point of an individual belief in God is not explicitly a rational process,
religious traditions, however, are conscious attempts at critically reflecting on this shared belief. The
history and practice of religion shows that the suggestion that religion is merely uncritical acceptance of
non-rational beliefs is simply untrue. The Catholic Catechism (indeed the last 2000 years of Christian
theology) is one example of how reason is used to develop consistent, coherent and integrated systems
of beliefs.
One thing TOK students should always remember is that reason is a process, not an outcome.
Reason is a process by which ideas are related to one another, not one which tells us whether the ideas
are ‘true’. There are any number of false beliefs (eg, that the Earth is flat), supported by ‘rational’
arguments. That the arguments are called rational doesn’t mean that you should think that they are true.
Many students who are not religious, think that because they think religious beliefs are ‘false’ they
cannot be rational, or that they cannot be rationally defended. This is simply not true. What these
students might find more fruitful is to explore the premises of the competing arguments in order to think
about how different premises might lead, through entirely rational development or analysis, to quite
different conclusions. Identifying where two arguments differ is far more complex and challenging to
students, which is why some will simply try to derail arguments they don’t like by claiming that they are
‘irrational’.
The Jewish Talmud is another good example of the role of reasoned interpretation and analysis of religious texts as
central to religious knowledge systems. While Jewish people hold the Torah as sacred (containing the direct
commandments of God), these texts are sometimes hard to interpret in light of modern development. Would the
commandment ‘Thou shalt not steal’ cover using an uncited image from the internet in a presentation in class?
Jewish people, however, also look to the Talmud, texts which contain commentaries of the Torah along with the
teachings of thousands of rabbis who analysed and reflected on those texts (Shurpin). The idea is that the original
Torah is complex and general, so working out how to apply it in a particular everyday modern context (like whether
using uncredited images breaks the commandment prohibiting stealing) needs analysis by people with the
experience and knowledge to do this responsibly. This further underscores the role of reasoned interpretation in the
development of Jewish religious belief.
IA prompt
1 What counts as knowledge?
Some would consider the ability to be tested as non-negotiable when it comes to whether a claim is actually
something that can be known or something that can be ‘reliable’. An argument from this perspective which
concludes that religious knowledge cannot be called ‘knowledge’ looks something like this parable, originally
offered by John Wisdom and later developed by Antony Flew (this is the author’s own retelling).
Imagine you and a friend happen across a clearing in a forest. Your friend, taken by the beauty of the spot
declares, ‘What a beautiful garden! The gardener is very talented.’ You see no obvious signs of purpose or
intent in the clearing, just a seemingly random collection of bushes, rocks and flowers. You say, ‘There is
no gardener here.’ It appears that the two of you disagree quite fundamentally about the truth of the
matter; you both accept the evidence before you, but you disagree on what exactly it is evidence of.
You propose a series of tests to determine which is correct. You suggest that you wait to see if a gardener
arrives, but one does not. Your friend says, ‘But the gardener is invisible.’ You suggest that you set up
some infrared devices, but nothing is detected. Your friend says, ‘But the gardener is utterly undetectable.’
You suggest that you wait to see if any changes in the garden itself occur that are not simply how things
naturally happen. The plants and bushes grow normally, the rocks do nothing out of the ordinary. Your
friend says, ‘But the gardener is working with and coordinating the natural processes.’
After many such interactions, you both come to realize that nothing that could ever be observed could
count against your friend’s claim that ‘there is a gardener’. Your friend will add to the definition of the
gardener some quality which would explain why nothing counts definitively against his claim. You will
each use all observations as evidence for your separate claims. Both of the claims ‘there is no gardener’
and ‘there is a gardener, who is undetectable’ are consistent with the agreed-upon evidence.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What is the value of thinking about questions to which there are no definite answers?
ACTIVITY
Carry on this conversation with a partner. One partner should offer an experiment which should detect
the gardener; the other should reply with an additional reason why that won’t work in this case. How far
can you get? What do you think this suggests about the reliability of the claim, ‘There is a gardener’?
In this case, Antony Flew argues that the two claims are meaningless because they both make claims about the
world, neither of which can be shown to be definitively true through appeal to observed facts. In this case, then, no
claims about divine beings (either for or against) should be counted as ‘knowledge’.
Flew suggests that this is different from scientific knowledge about the world. Consider the following claims:
1 The MMR vaccine causes autism.
2 The MMR vaccine does not cause autism.
One of these claims might be true, but they cannot both be, so we need to look to the world, apply the scientific
method and decide which of these claims is justified by appealing to facts in the world. So far, all the available
scientific evidence (that evidence gained through the rigorous application of the scientific method, not evidence
gained through misapplication of the method or based on mere anecdote), shows that there is no evidence for claim
1 and that all the available data suggests claim 2 is true. The opposite might have been true, but this has not
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
happened.
So, by looking at the world around us, it is possible to say that in this world, claim 1 is false and claim 2 is true. This
suggests that both 1 and 2 are both meaningful because they describe a situation which we are able to test.
Furthermore, we have made the tests and discovered that, in fact, claim 2 is false. This ability to use facts to show
something is false means that the claims are indeed ‘scientific’ (because they describe this world) and can therefore
be ‘scientific knowledge’.
Flew uses this notion (and the parable about the gardener on the previous page) to suggest that religious claims
cannot be thought of as knowledge. Now consider a common claim in the western traditions such as ‘God loves me’.
ACTIVITY
1 Play the dialogue game from the last activity but now with the claim ‘God loves me’. The first partner
should offer reasons not to believe it – based on real facts in the world. The second partner should
reply, explaining why those reasons don’t really contradict the claim. How far can you get?
2 Consider what other sources of knowledge, other than sensory observation of the world, a religious
believer might appeal to in order to justify their claim. Do the second partner’s reasons draw from facts
in the world, or redefinitions of the notion of ‘God’ or ‘love’?
3 What conclusions about the reliability of the claim can you draw?
There seems to be a lot of counter-evidence against the claim that ‘God loves us’: people are subject to grave
political and social injustice and violence, people lose their jobs for unjust reasons, people get sick and die. These
would seem to count against the claim that there is a loving God looking after people, but often religious people will
suggest that God still loves us, but then qualify their understanding of God to allow what appears to be evidence
counter to the claim. They might say that God is testing us, helping us be stronger, or giving us the freedom to
respond and help others, developing charity and kindness which are traits God wants us to have. In other words, it
seems that no matter how bad things are, all these things are still compatible with the claim that God loves us.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does religion try to resolve problems that other areas can’t resolve?
For many, a religious belief is simply a belief in some supernatural being. There are more and less sophisticated
versions of this type of belief, but belief in some supernatural being or beings is central. As we saw above, however,
one of the ways of understanding the context of religion is in terms of its etymology: religare, the Latin for
‘binding’. This brings out the notion that religious knowledge systems are about linking people with supernatural
beings, not just in terms of belief, but in terms of behaviour or living your life. Paul Tillich, a twentieth-century
theologian defines religion as:
the state of being grasped by an ultimate concern, a concern which qualifies all other concerns as
preliminary and which itself contains the answer to the question of the meaning of our life. Therefore this
concern is unconditionally serious and shows a willingness to sacrifice any finite concern which is in
conflict with it. The predominant religious name for the content of such concern is God. (Tillich)
Rather than focusing on supernatural beings, Tillich’s definition is helpful in that it focuses instead on the notion of
the meaning or significance of religious knowledge systems. By ‘ultimate concern’, Tillich is pointing out that
religious belief tends to focus on what people believe to be the most important element of their lives, that element
which all activity should be aimed at. Indeed, this concern is ‘infinite’ in that it is that which is greater than all other
‘finite’ concerns, even our own personal interests. Religion deals with that which is more important than any other
thing, our own lives included. For many religious people their notion of ‘God’ represents that which they should be
most ‘concerned’ by. (‘Concern’ here doesn’t necessarily mean ‘worried by’ but more like, ‘most interested in’.)
God, in other words, is that which is the most important, the most significant thing we could possibly concern
ourselves with.
In this definition of religion we encounter the notion of a supreme, supernatural being, but we also encounter the
notion that we are committed to this being, drawn to this being, obligated to it in a way that is more profound than
any other commitment we could have. In fact, as the quote above suggests, all other concerns are necessarily less
crucial than our ultimate concern. We may be ‘concerned’ or interested in money, friends or an excellent job, we
might devote our lives to helping others or to simply aiming to be the best we can be, but a religious believer might
say that these activities are done in the service of something greater. On their own these goals fall short of being
‘ultimate’. A Hindu might say, ‘Sure, aim for that good job and happy life, but if you are not trying to build good
karma, then you’re not worried about the right things.’ A Jew might say, ‘Sure, working hard to gain a promotion at
work is good, but if you are violating the Torah to do it, then you’re not worried about the right things.’ The idea is
that our own individual or immediate concerns and needs will never outweigh the ultimate concerns and needs,
which is nothing less than our eternal well-being. The limited concerns which occupy our secular, everyday lives
only impact us ‘locally’, rather than ‘absolutely’. We might even devote our lives to helping others, but here again
the impact is limited to those we help. The idea of God, or our gods, however, for Tillich reaches far beyond that.
Whatever happens to those we help, there is still the larger question of God and our relationship to God and our
obligations to God.
IA prompt
2 Are some types of knowledge more useful than others?
What religious knowledge systems are meant to engage with, then, are those things which give our lives meaning
and significance. Whereas scientific or historical claims describe what happened and why and where, religious
knowledge systems try to make sense of what is eternally meaningful. In focusing on those things about which we
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
should be most concerned, religious beliefs orientate us toward how we should be, rather than simply how we are.
Religious knowledge systems give us goals and priorities and codes of behaviour.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Values
Values is one of the key concepts of the TOK course and here we see that religious knowledge systems
provide many people their ultimate values. This means that for religious believers there can be nothing
more important than their religious devotions and all other values are part of this ultimate value. As we
saw on page 185 with the Catholic Catechism, the ‘system’ of religious knowledge is all about exploring
those things that we do value in life (family, job, friends, health), in order to understand them in relation
to God. For many Catholics, every aspect of their lives – everything that they value – is related to and
directed towards God, which is the most valued thing.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
If knowledge is a map, what is the territory that religion represents?
Many scientists believe there to be no conflict between ‘religious’ belief in a supernatural designer of the world and
a complete ‘scientific’ explanation of that world, but they generally accept that when they shift from thinking about
the natural world to thinking about what stands outside of and in control of that natural world, they are no longer
doing science. This is why there is no conflict: science is great for working out the mechanisms of this world, but it
is an entirely different question (ie, not a question science can ask or answer) when asking about what happens
outside the world of scientific observation.
So how useful is Gould’s initial claim that science and religion offer ‘non-overlapping’ explanations? On the one
hand, Gould’s division is too simplistic, because many believers in religious knowledge systems believe their
religious knowledge to include claims about the world; it is their religious conviction that, for example, what the
Book of Genesis in the Hebrew Torah (the Christian Old Testament) says about the creation of the world really is
how it happened. On the other hand, Gould’s division is useful when thinking about what constitutes good evidence
in the context of an AOK (especially in the natural sciences) and useful when thinking about what religious
knowledge systems are best suited at doing. Thinking about the scope and application of natural science and
religious knowledge systems gives you the opportunity to compare the two and suggests that when doing science,
one cannot appeal to an ancient text as part of that ‘scientific’ process.
IA prompt
5 What counts as good evidence for a claim?
It is unlikely his wife would be impressed, even if she were a neurologist, because that is an inappropriate use of that
sort of language in that context. She would probably prefer it if her husband were to say something like, ‘I love you
more every day’ instead. Similarly, a teacher might get fired were they to see the head teacher at morning assembly
and shout from across the room ‘What’s up, Steve-O?’ If the teacher addressed the head teacher in that manner, they
would be acting as if the two of them were close friends. They might be, but in the context of the workplace that
would be inappropriate. That particular way of using language is appropriate in the language-game of ‘greeting close
friends’, whereas the teacher really should be playing the language-game, ‘addressing my work colleague and
superior’. The use of language in the anniversary card mistook the game the husband should have been playing:
‘telling his partner how much he loved and valued her’, instead of using language that was more appropriate for the
language-game ‘describing scientifically the neurological and hormonal foundations of psychological attachment’.
In other words, the context of our use of language impacts how we should use the language and what that particular
use of the language means.
This might not seem like a ground-breaking insight, but we can find its significance in terms of how differently
religious knowledge systems use language. Earlier, I mentioned that sometimes religious knowledge systems extend
into other AOKs. One such claim would be ‘Jesus was resurrected’, a central belief in Christianity. Most Christians
consider that a historical claim, meaning that they believe it to refer to a genuine historical fact: at one point Jesus
was dead, having been crucified by the Romans, then at a later point he was biologically alive and engaging with his
followers. However, Wittgenstein suggests that the language-game being played by a religious believer who makes
this claim is nevertheless quite different than if a historian were to say it. He says:
Christianity is not based on a historical truth; rather, it offers us a (historical) narrative and says: now
believe! But not, believe this narrative with the belief appropriate to a historical narrative, rather: believe
through thick and thin, which you can only do as a result of a life. Here you have a narrative, don’t take
the same attitude to it as you take to other historical narratives! Make a quite different place in your life
for it. (Wittgenstein, et al 32 [emphasis in original])
IA prompt
14 Does some knowledge only belong to particular communities of knowers?
Wittgenstein suggests that this is not the approach or use a religious believer would take towards the claim. Whereas
a historian would evaluate the claim, the religious person (in this case a Christian), believes the claim. They still
accept it as a historical truth (they believe it did happen), but they might hold it in their mind (as Wittgenstein says)
‘lovingly’ or ‘believingly’ as a believer. In relation to religious belief he says that ‘what I [the Christian] need is
certainty … and this certainty is faith’ (Wittgenstein, et al 33). Certainty is not really an option in the methodology
or language-game of science or history, it is generally a matter of ‘more or less confirmed’. The certainty provided
by a religious acceptance of the claim provides the believer a picture or understanding of the world that is used to
provide guidance and direction and their identity, which isn’t part of the attitude a historian would take towards the
claim.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is certainty any more or less attainable in religion than it is in the arts or human sciences?
Wittgenstein references a debate he was having with a Catholic priest, Father O’Hara, who was attempting to ground
religious claims in science and argue that belief in the resurrection is a good historical or scientific belief, one that is
strong enough for a historian or scientist to accept on the grounds of the historical or scientific method. Wittgenstein
suggests that when the priest reduces religious claims to merely scientific claims, he lowers the value of religious
belief to ‘superstition’, by which he means that, if the priest is taking a scientific attitude towards a religious claim
then all he has accomplished is to make poorly justified scientific claims (Wittgenstein and Barrett 59). To maintain
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
the power and certainty of the religious claims, the believer must treat it differently.
One might argue that this approach of Father O’Hara (that religious claims should be evaluated in terms of the
historical or scientific methods) is precisely the attitude taken by some of the popular modern critics of religious
belief, but in the critics’ view the religious claims never muster the strength to be accepted on historical or scientific
terms. The ‘New Atheism’ movement takes a similar approach in their highly critical view of religious faith, first
suggesting that religious claims are always meant to be evaluated against scientific or historical criteria and then
suggesting that these claims are worse than simply being untrue, they are genuinely dangerous (Poole).
Whatever you make of the moral judgment that religious belief is dangerous, the movement seems based on an
acceptance of religious belief as simply scientific or historical claims, similar to the way Wittgenstein sees Father
O’Hara’s use of religious claims. As we’ve seen, though, when a believer makes a religious claim, there might be
‘entirely different connections’ being made (Wittgenstein and Barrett 58), such that if a Christian were to claim
‘Jesus has been resurrected’ and a scientist were to say ‘Jesus was not resurrected’, they might mean such different
things that they don’t even genuinely contradict one another.
These types of religious connections need to be understood before the whole form of knowing is dismissed. If the
new atheists’ claims are that religious claims are not scientific claims, we might accept this: they represent different
forms and different areas of knowledge, each with its own methods. To characterize all religious belief as bad
science, however, and then dismiss it for being bad science is to wilfully misread the scope and application of what
religious knowledge systems are generally trying to do.
Of course, the issue is rather more complex than this, as Wittgenstein’s use of Father O’Hara’s scientific defence of
Christian belief in the resurrection suggests. In many cases, religious believers are making historical and scientific
claims about the world when making religious claims. Most traditional Christians do believe that ‘Jesus was
resurrected’ is literally true. It describes an event which really happened.
Whether religious claims are meant to be evaluated using the criteria from other areas of knowledge for establishing
reliable claims is a difficult question. Perhaps we can consider what religious knowledge systems are trying to
describe? If religions are ‘maps’ to guide us through and help us understand our human experience in the world, just
what is the landscape being described?
Augustine of Hippo, a Bishop in north Africa in the fifth century, suggested that reason and faith are compatible and
necessary to genuinely understand Christian doctrine. He says:
Heaven forbid, I say, that we should believe in such a way that we do not accept or seek a rational
account, since we could not even believe if we did not have rational souls. In certain matters, therefore,
pertaining to the teaching of salvation, which we cannot yet grasp by reason, but which we will be able to
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
at some point, faith precedes reason so that the heart may be purified in order that it may receive and
sustain the light of the great reason. (Augustine, et al)
So, Augustine’s position is that we are, by nature, rational beings, and we must use that reason to help us understand
our faith. He quotes the Old Testament: Unless you believe you will not understand (Isaiah 7:9) to suggest how faith
and reason work together. While there are certain elements of Christian doctrine (Salvation and the Trinity in this
case) that are to be accepted by faith, this acceptance by faith is nevertheless able to be explored through reason to
aim at understanding.
IA prompt
18 Are some things unknowable?
DEEPER THINKING
Acceptance and understanding
This distinction between acceptance and understanding is an interesting one in the world of TOK and
can be used to explore knowledge claims across all the areas of knowledge. You might, for example,
accept that your teacher’s claim that some mathematical theorem is true or that the chemical structure
for some molecule is a certain shape, even if you don’t understand for yourself just what that means.
Consider how much of your own knowledge gained over your entire school career is accepted in this
manner, through the authority of your teacher. However, accepting claims like this and for these reasons
is not unreasonable; you should consider your teacher a reliable source of knowledge and so should
‘have faith’ in their claims. This, however, does not mean that reason has no part to play in your
developing a full understanding of those claims. Having accepted that mathematical theorems and
chemical structures are knowledge and accepting the way and methods they use to describe certain
features of the world, then you can develop your understanding of the phenomenon by applying your
reason to further study the claims.
Augustine is suggesting that religious knowledge systems can follow a similar pattern. If you are a
Christian, you might accept the central doctrines of the faith, but then use your reason to make sense of
it. Indeed, in other writings, Augustine suggests that when the literal meaning of biblical texts (in this
case the creation story in Genesis) contradicts what reason tells us, then we should treat the biblical
texts as metaphorical (Augustine of Hippo).
ACTIVITY
We’ve suggested that faith before understanding is one traditional approach of religious knowledge
systems.
1 Do you think this is a reliable method?
2 Can you think of other examples in other AOKs where you might be asked to accept something before
you can truly understand it?
3 Do you think those situations are different or similar to the religious context?
Why would anyone start with the acceptance through faith suggested by Augustine on the previous page? In the
secular examples we used earlier, a student would have good reasons to accept what their teacher said in the first
place; as an authority in their subject, it makes good sense initially to take what the teacher says as reliable even if
the student is going to apply reason to more deeply understand it later. In the case of religious claims, though, what
impetus is there to accept the ideas to begin with?
We will discuss ‘religious experience’ later, but we might start the discussion here. In many cases, the initial
acceptance of religious claims might be based on a deeply personal and powerful experience. Blaise Pascal was a
seventeenth-century scientist and mathematician who, in 1654, had a religious experience which changed the course
of his life. He had been born and raised in France as a Catholic but hadn’t written much on religious matters until
after this particular experience, after which he seemed to have devalued mathematics and science as the most
powerful knowledge available (O’Connell). So powerful was the experience that, after he frantically wrote it down,
he sewed it into the lining of his coat so it would never be far from him for the rest of his life. This Memorial was
found after his death:
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Justification
The idea here is that Pascal’s justification for his belief in God is clearly drawn from a different source,
than a traditional argument that uses premises and arguments. This sort of justification by experience is
certainly not the sort of thing that scientists would accept either. While scientific experiments certainly
start with the personal experience of a scientist (they observe the results of an experience), those
observations must be able to be recreated in further experiments and by other scientists. Pascal’s
experience, of course, is not repeatable, nor could any other person experience it. Perhaps what
‘justification’ looks like is different in the contexts of different AOKs.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Are faith and reason interdependent?
ACTIVITY
Begin by first reading each of the argument summaries, which start on page 204.
Try your best to understand the arguments in the most charitable way you can (you don’t want your
evaluation to be based on a misunderstanding of the argument). Then see if you can identify any
weaknesses in the arguments and try to articulate them.
1 What do you think of the four types of arguments presented here?
2 How might you develop them to make them stronger?
3 How might a critic offer challenges to the arguments?
4 Do you think that finding a weakness in each of the arguments necessarily means that God does not
exist?
ACTIVITY
For each of the arguments that follow, see if you can create a formal version of them. By ‘formal’ version
we mean a version in the form premise, premise … conclusion, where the conclusion in each case is
‘God exists’.
Ontological arguments
‘Ontological’ arguments offer an analysis of the concept of ‘God’ (‘ontological’ means ‘the study of being’) to show
that this concept must refer to something which actually does exist in the world. The starting point is a definition or
understanding of God as something like ‘a supremely perfect being’. This means that God must have all the
perfections (things that make one great, like knowledge, power, goodness) and must have them in the highest
capacity.
Learner profile
Thinkers
Is reason just as important to religious belief as faith?
The argument assumes that even the non-believer would accept this as a definition, even if the non-believer thinks
this definition doesn’t apply to anything in reality. As the argument progresses, it suggests that it is better or more
perfect to exist in reality rather than only existing in the mind as an idea. If this is the case, then even the non-
believer must accept that the supremely perfect being (a being that is as perfect as perfect can be) must also exist in
reality, because, if God were only to exist as an idea (as the non-believer suggests) then God cannot be defined as
‘supremely perfect’. So, having accepted the definition of God, the non-believer seems committed to accepting that
that thing (the supremely perfect being) must exist in both our minds as an idea, but also as a real object in the
world. Therefore ‘God exists’ is true.
Analysis: One common approach a TOK student can take when evaluating knowledge claims is to uncover any
hidden assumptions in arguments. In this argument there is an assumption that many critics have suggested show
that this argument is unsound – in other words, there is a premise which is unacceptable. The unacceptable premise
here is the suggestion that something can be more or less perfect depending on whether or not it ‘has’ existence.
This does sound plausible, however. Suppose we asked someone which was better, ie, which would they rather
have: an idea of a shoebox containing £100 or an actual shoebox actually containing £100. They would definitely
say the latter is better. But to say that existing in the world is better than to exist only as an idea is to suggest we can
take one thing (a shoebox full of money in this case) and say that that thing can either have or not have the property
of ‘existence’. What sense does it make to say that there is an object on the table in front of us, but we cannot see,
touch, feel, hear, taste or smell it because it lacks ‘existence’? In that case we would more properly say there is
nothing at all on the table. It makes no sense to say, ‘I have a shoebox full of money but unfortunately it doesn’t have
existence’. As a result, saying that there is a God in our mind which has everything which makes it perfect, except
existence, means we simply don’t have anything at all. The ontological argument asks us to accept that having
existence is better, but the critic can simply say, if something lacks existence, it isn’t less perfect, it is nothing.
Another important critique has to do with the general strategy of the argument. It hopes to convince us that by
analysing the concept of God we can discover truths about a God that is meant to exist in this world. However, the
best way to establish claims about an object in this world is not through analysing the definition of things, but to
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
actually investigate the things themselves to see if they are true. For example, it might be true that the King Arthur
of mythology has a wife named Guinevere, but this fact has no bearing on whether the historical King Arthur also
had a wife named Guinevere. No amount of reading the King Arthur legends will give me any legitimate evidence
for historical claims about the real King Arthur. Genuine evidence from the world is needed to make claims about
the King Arthur in this world. Similarly, then, no amount of simply thinking about God will provide any evidence
for believing those same things about a real God. Just because the concept of God suggests that God must exist in
the real world, does not mean that there actually is a God in the real world! We would need real-world evidence to
make that claim (Alston 1960).
The other three types of arguments do try to offer evidence taken from the world for the existence of God.
Teleological arguments
Telos is a Greek term meaning something’s endpoint or goal or ultimate aim. Teleological arguments for the
existence of God start by arguing that the features in the world are so complex or finely tuned that the best
explanation for them is that there has been a goal in mind from the start. The argument from design (ie, intelligent
design, as discussed earlier) is an example of this type of argument. The world is awesomely complex and works
together too well for it to have been the result of a random, unorganized process. It must have been designed with
some goal (telos) in mind. That designer, then, is God. Another related argument makes use of the anthropic
principle, which argues that the world’s processes have created conditions that are just right for the existence of
human beings. Had any of the conditions been even slightly off, the conditions for life would never have existed and
the Universe would be a cold, dark place devoid of even basic life forms, let alone a wonderous place containing
human beings, with the consciousness sufficient for understanding the truths of the Universe. These arguments
consider the scientific explanation of the phenomenon under consideration to be inadequate and so add another type
of explanation to account for the complex features of the world.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Explanation
Here again we see a disagreement about what makes a better explanation. The facts being described
here are perceived quite differently by the theist (one who claims God does exist) and the atheist (one
who claims God doesn’t exist). The theist believes that the world is designed, the other does not. Given
these different descriptions of the world, different explanations then are needed. The theist suggests that
scientific explanations may tell us how the world works but cannot tell us why the world is the way that it
is. Another ‘level’ of explanation is required, one that steps beyond the world as we experience it and
uses concepts like ‘design’, ‘designer’, ‘creation’ and ‘God’. These concepts are not available to the
scientist (nor are they even desired).
Analysis: These arguments rest on a couple of assumptions. Firstly, that the complexity that is actually present in
the world (something even non-believers would agree exists) cannot be adequately explained by appeal only to
scientific principles. Secondly, they assume that the only plausible explanation must be the existence of some
supernatural, divine process guiding the world towards a final goal. Together these assumptions amount to the
position that the world is obviously designed and so obviously needs a designer. This argument can be quite
compelling – it is hard, for example, to understand what the human eye evolved from, because every element of
human vision must be precisely what it is now for it to work and any ‘previous version’ wouldn’t have worked so
wouldn’t have been an eye at all.
However, both assumptions are highly contentious, and an atheist might respond in two ways. Firstly, the theory of
evolution by natural selection is an adequate explanation; the complexity of the world and the existence of human
beings (with all their incredibly complex systems) can be explained in terms of the concepts within evolutionary
theory, whether evolution deniers like it or not. There might be unanswered questions in the application of the
theory, but nothing suggests that the theory of evolution is wholly inappropriate or wholly inadequate. Secondly,
that even in those instances where science doesn’t fully know or understand some phenomena, that this only means
that science is incomplete, not that an entirely different set of principles based in a supernatural perspective is
necessary. No one thinks that science has discovered everything we can know, and the historical development of
science shows that more knowledge is always on the horizon, not that we have necessarily reached the limits. While
there might be some questions about what stands outside the scope of science (perhaps questions about how we
Use the QR code on the right to watch Sam Harris’s TED talk.
What does this all imply regarding religious knowledge systems?
What these arguments suggest is that reason can play a huge role in an individual’s or a community’s belief in the
existence of God. Very often people suggest that religious belief is something that cannot be thoughtful, rational or
well justified, but this is simply not the case. While non-believers might not accept that these arguments are
convincing, they would be desperately uncharitable to suggest that they were ‘irrational’. Theologian Richard
Swinburne accepts that no one of these arguments will ever carry the weight of a scientific proof, meaning it is
unlikely that any argument would, on purely rational grounds, move someone from disbelief to belief. However, he
argues, the weight of all the various arguments combined provide a good and perfectly rational justification for the
belief in God’s existence (Swinburne).
As we’ve seen throughout this chapter, reason plays a huge part in developing religious beliefs, understanding and
analysing those beliefs, and applying those beliefs to the business of living a human life.
IA prompt
22 What role do experts play in influencing our consumption or acquisition of knowledge?
The concept of authority is an important one for religious knowledge systems and must be considered as a primary
tool used to construct religious knowledge. In nearly all the religious traditions there are individuals who are
considered to be authorities and whose opinions and proclamations are accepted as ‘truth’ by the followers of that
religion. The clearest example in the world of a religious authority is perhaps the Catholic Pope.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do different AOKs treat the authority of individuals differently?
The Pope’s position as being in authority here is derived from his apostolic succession from the first Roman head of
the church, St Peter, whom Christian tradition claims was the person who Jesus Christ left in charge of his church.
The man who takes on the role of Pope, however, is also an authority on Catholic doctrine. Indeed, all bishops must
‘hold a doctorate or at least a licentiate in sacred scripture, theology or canon law, from an institute of higher studies
approved by the Apostolic See, or at least be well versed in these disciplines’ (‘Code of Canon Law’ 378).
Many religions have individuals whose word counts as authoritative, however. Their authority is established in a
number of ways, from education and experience, in the case of the Pope, and the same is often true for other priests
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
(Catholicism), ministers and pastors (Christianity), rabbis (Judaism), monks (Christianity and Buddhism), gurus
(Hinduism) or Shinto priests. These men and women have, in many cases, devoted their lives to learning about their
religions and to passing their knowledge on to others; this makes them reliable sources of knowledge about that
religion’s doctrines and practices. In other cases, an individual’s authority is established through their having some
sort of experience which has revealed to them some truth which hasn’t been available to others (see the section on
Religious experience beginning on page 213).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What role do authority and testimony play in the pursuit of knowledge?
The ‘world religions’ are often focused on a sacred text which articulates the core beliefs of the religion. For
instance, the primary sacred text of Judaism is the Torah (a Hebrew word meaning ‘instruction’), which Christians
recognize as the Old Testament. The Torah tells the history of the Jewish people from the creation of the world
(Genesis) through the revelations of the Prophets and the early history of the Jewish kingdoms in what is modern
Israel. The first five books of the Torah are the most foundational because they contain the basic moral codes which
are meant to be followed by Jews, known as the ‘Ten Commandments’. The Torah actually contains 613 mitzvot
(commandments) which an adult Jew might use to govern nearly every aspect of their life. These commandments
are thought to have been delivered by God directly to Moses, an early leader of the Jewish people.
Islam also reveres its sacred text, the Qur’an. Believers in Islam generally accept a direct connection to what they
call ‘the People of the Book’, meaning Jews and Christians, because they accept the Jewish prophets and leaders as
followers of the same God. Islam differs however, in the view that God or ‘Allah’ last spoke directly to a sixth
century man living in Mecca (now Saudia Arabia) named Muhammad, and that these new revelations replace all
others. Muhammad ensured that everything Allah told him was written down exactly as Allah said it. These writings
are the Qur’an, which became the foundational text upon which all Muslim beliefs are based.
The attitude towards sacred texts in religious knowledge systems is another distinguishing feature between this form
of knowing and others. In many of the AOKs, knowledge claims are based on observable evidence; a claim is
justified if the evidence for it is adequate. In the sciences and history this evidence is generally publicly observable
and can be evaluated by disinterested observers. Religious knowledge systems, in contrast, often refer to their texts
as the primary evidence for, and the definitive authority on, certain claims. This is generally more characteristic of
the western religious traditions. For many Christians and Muslims their texts are the ultimate foundations upon
which the rest of their religious beliefs rest; if a belief or action is inconsistent with what is written in those texts
then it is the belief or behaviour which must change. In both religious traditions, concepts like ‘infallibility’ and
‘inerrancy’ are used to describe the nature of the texts. The degree to which people hold the texts as infallible or
inerrant could be used to describe the extent to which the believer is a ‘fundamentalist’.
In a religious context, where different interpretations might create fault lines between different denominations, or
where the texts might not say anything about modern worries or concerns, the problems of interpretation are
multiplied. We saw earlier that in the Christian and Jewish traditions there is a long history of struggling with
exactly what the sacred texts mean and how to interpret them.
The Tao te Ching, one of the primary texts of Taoism, raises a particularly challenging problem on the status of the
text as a source of knowledge in its first section:
IA prompt
9 Are some types of knowledge less open to interpretation than others?
The worry here is that if one is attempting to understand the Tao, the unnamable force and natural processes at the
root of existence, then applying a name (or using language to describe it) will necessarily miss the mark. Language
is a human convention which is created in a particular time and place and in a particular community. Applying it to
something which is instead the root of all time and space will mean that nothing you say will ever capture the
essence of what you’re trying to describe. Taoism is a religious knowledge system which prioritizes personal
experience, perhaps even special revelation (see section on Religious experience, page 213) to truly understand the
nature of the Tao.
In the western religious traditions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) this is less of a worry, because their central
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
focus is on a divine being which reveals itself to human individuals, often in the form of words meant to be written
down. Both Moses (in Judaism) and Muhammad (in Islam) received revelations from God which were in the form of
language. Moses was given the Jewish commandments (all 613 of them) by God on Mount Sinai sometime in the
second millennium BCE and these became the Jewish Torah. Muhammad received his revelations from Allah
beginning in AD 610. In each of these cases, the texts are understood to be faithful representations of God’s own
words.
Even in these cases, however, just how to interpret individual phrases in relation to all the other elements of the text
is not always clear. The Christian sacred text, the New Testament, contains the Gospels – the life story of Jesus
Christ (whom Christians believe was God in human form) – and other texts written by early followers of Christ and
early church leaders. Although Jesus didn’t command things to be written down, his life’s example and his words
were chronicled by his early followers. At one point, Jesus is asked what the greatest commandments are. He
replies, ‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’ This is the first
and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbour as yourself.’ The law and the word of
the prophets should be read as being consistent with these two commandments (The Bible, Matthew 22:37–40). It
seems that Jesus then has pulled two of the Jewish commandments and prioritized them over all the others. But some
of the other laws, particularly those having to do with the punishment of those who have transgressed the laws, seem
to directly contradict the second of Jesus’ main commandments. Homosexual behaviour, for instance, is meant to be
punished by death (The Bible, Leviticus 20:13), which is also the penalty for adultery (The Bible, Leviticus 20:10,
Deuteronomy 22:22) and not being a virgin at the time of marriage (The Bible, Deuteronomy 22:23–24). On the face
of it these seem to be precisely how not to love your neighbour as yourself.
The worry, if we are to use them to construct or justify religious knowledge, is just how to interpret these texts,
particularly when there is a perceived conflict. One answer is not to simply accept the decontextualized verses or
individual phrases as they are, but as they illustrate the overall message of the piece. Religious texts are like other
non-sacred texts in that they are meant to hang together as a whole, even if individual elements are in tension with
one another. These texts might have a beginning, middle and end, where each element feeds into the next,
culminating in final message. Some texts don’t have a succession of ideas, but nevertheless each element contributes
to a whole. Again, from the Tao:
This list of direct contradictions seems utterly unhelpful as a guide for how to live. However, the text as a whole
helps make sense of this passage. It is like a puzzle: while each individual piece might have an image on it, the fact
that they are designed to fit together suggests that, whatever the image on the piece, it is incomplete by itself, but
adds to the whole. You might have seen people using snippets of a sacred text to bolster whatever point they wish to
make, but it is important to remember that whatever the individual element of the text says, that is not the message
of the text as a whole. This is why scholars will devote their academic careers or even their lives to studying the
texts, hoping to uncover and understand the message as a whole.
ACTIVITY
The terms ‘religious dogma’ and ‘dogmatic’ are often used in negative terms to mean ideas or beliefs
that are held for the wrong reasons. Someone who is dogmatic might be unwilling to change their beliefs
or accept alternatives, and may even be actively trying to impose those beliefs on others.
1 Can you identify and articulate the principle upon which this negative connotation rests? What is the
principle that, if true, would make someone calling someone ‘dogmatic’ a negative term?
2 You might think about how other AOKs might treat someone who held certain beliefs as
unchangeable. Would this be acceptable in other AOKs?
3 How might the community of knowers in that AOK treat such a person who held faithfully onto a
particular claim without changing?
One difference with religious dogma, however, might be a consequence of the different scope of religious
knowledge systems in relation to other AOKs. Because religious knowledge systems are generally about the
individual’s relationship to the ultimate reality, and because religious knowledge systems are about the ultimate
values, happiness and meaning in the world, people will hold on to dogmatic beliefs in a way that is less like how a
mathematician might accept assumptions about the properties of triangles or an economist might accept assumptions
about how people make decisions. For a religious believer, their adherence to a set of beliefs matters in a way that
these other beliefs do not. Sure, it is important to get the maths right or to be able to understand how economies
work to avoid financial ruin, but one’s soul is not at stake, as religious believers think theirs is.
IA prompt
20 What is the relationship between personal experience and knowledge?
There are two general forms of religious experience, and the knowledge provided by these two forms are quite
different.
General revelation
Learner profile
Communicators
How can we share knowledge gained from personal experiences, like religious revelation?
Have you ever felt inspired by the beauty of a sunrise or become emotional when considering the kindness of a
stranger, feeling perhaps that there’s something greater going on than simply the rising of the Sun or someone doing
something kind? These events are relatively straightforward and (literally) everyday occurrences and can be
witnessed by anyone. However, sometimes these events make us feel particularly emotional and might bring to mind
thoughts and ideas about the world or its people that are far more profound than those you would normally have.
These types of experiences in the context of religious knowledge systems might be called ‘general revelation’,
which means that knowledge about the divine or about divine action in the world is pulled from what otherwise
might be thought of as a perfectly natural phenomenon. Many religious believers, having experiences which are not
private to them (like sunrises or interactions with strangers) will interpret or explain them in terms specific to their
religious beliefs. The beauty of a sunrise becomes for them a reminder of God’s presence in the world and God’s
promises to them. The kindness of strangers becomes God’s own kindness in the world.
Special revelation
Another form of ‘revelation’ is often referred to as ‘special’ revelation, and this can be more contentious. ‘Special’
revelation refers to an experience which happens to an individual, but which is private to the individual. Whereas in
general revelation the experience itself (for instance, seeing a sunrise) is a public event – everyone can experience it
– in special revelations, people report having experiences which are private to them. The knowledge conferred is
often new and this gaining new knowledge is often the essence of the experience, not something which is
interpreted.
CASE STUDY
Muhammad and the revelation of the Qur’an
While Muhammad’s revelations took the form of immediate knowledge, not all special revelations are as clear and
unambiguous, although they nevertheless carry clear knowledge content.
CASE STUDY
Julian of Norwich
Julian of Norwich was a Christian mystic who lived in England in the fourteenth century. In her
Revelations of Divine Love, which incidentally is the oldest text in the English language written by a
woman, she describes a series of revelations or ‘shewings’ which she had while seriously ill and near
death. Over the course of two nights she had a number of visions which she later wrote about. What is
interesting about these special revelations is that they are largely based on imagery, but the
interpretation of those images are also revealed to her. She doesn’t add her own interpretation later, she
experiences the knowledge directly. Here’s one example:
Also in this He shewed me a little thing, the quantity of an hazel-nut, in the palm of my hand;
and it was as round as a ball. I looked thereupon with eye of my understanding, and thought:
What may this be? And it was answered generally thus: it is all that is made. I marvelled how it
might last, for methought it might suddenly have fallen to naught for little[ness]. And I was
answered in my understanding: It lasteth, and ever shall [last] for that God loveth it. And so All-
thing hath the Being by the love of God. In this Little Thing I saw three properties. The first is
that God made it, the second is that God loveth it, the third, that God keepeth it. But what is to
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
me verily the Maker, the Keeper, and the Lover,—I cannot tell; for till I am Substantially oned to
Him, I may never have full rest nor very bliss: that is to say, till I be so fastened to Him, that
there is right nought that is made betwixt my God and me. (Julian of Norwich, Project
Gutenberg)
The knowledge revealed in special revelation poses a challenge to those trying to decide how reliable or
‘true’ the knowledge is. Here again, there are no ways we can apply anything like the scientific method to
the claims, the source of the knowledge itself was entirely private to Julian. On these grounds we may
be sceptical and dismiss them. However, religious knowledge systems around the world take these
types of experiences very seriously, just as we saw how Indigenous people also accept these types of
visions and experiences as genuine sources of knowledge.
ACTIVITY
Consider the two broad types of revelation that we’ve discussed here – general and special.
1 How would you rate them in relation to their reliability or certainty?
2 Do you think that revelation is more or less certain for the person having the experience?
When considering the status of claims based on revelation, it would be very easy to dismiss them on the grounds that
they were either private, or simply expressions of illusions or dreams, but this might be to apply an unfair criterion
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
for what makes something believable, one that is based on a prejudice (pre-judgment) against religious experience.
If you are an atheist, for instance, you will very likely find no claims about religious experience believable, because
you already believe that such experiences cannot be experiences of anything real. However, why should we
automatically not accept claims about religious experience as at least possibly true, even if we might not, on later
reflection and analysis accept them to be true.
TOK trap
It would be a mistake to assume that religious knowledge is not genuine knowledge. You might think this
(and many do), but you would have to offer reasons for this belief, since people have throughout the
centuries felt that religious knowledge is a legitimate sort of knowledge. Here we have tried to start from
a charitable position but have also tried to use the TOK concepts and framework to explore challenges
to this view.
Richard Swinburne argues that generally speaking, when listening to other people talk about their experiences we
apply (not necessarily consciously) two principles. The first he calls the principle of credulity, by which he means
that in most cases we will accept that what our senses tell us is a good reason to believe that that is how things really
are. If we hear a voice, for instance, we tend to accept that there is a speaker. If we see a person before us, this gives
us good reason to believe there is actually a person before us. Swinburne accepts that our senses sometimes deceive
us (especially when it is dark, for instance, or in the case of optical illusions), but generally speaking, our senses are
pretty reliable. This, therefore, is a good rule of thumb to live by, except when there are other good reasons for
thinking that the senses might not be truthful in some particular instance.
IA prompt
1 What counts as knowledge?
The other principle relevant here is the principle of testimony, which suggests that generally speaking, believing
what others tell you is a good way of gaining knowledge. People, by and large, tend not to lie to us, so as another
good rule of thumb, we should believe that what they tell us happened to them, really did happen to them, unless we
have other good reasons to think they are lying.
These two principles, Swinburne suggests, are at the root of how we create knowledge every day and in all sorts of
circumstances. The testimony of an eyewitness, for instance, is used by historians as reliable evidence that what the
witness says happened, really did happen. Scientists rely very heavily on the principle that their senses are very good
indicators of what actually happened. No one, Swinburne included, would suggest that scientists always get their
observations right, or that all eyewitnesses should be believed 100 per cent, but the point is that the testimony of
others about what they experienced should not be immediately dismissed as impossible. Applied to the testimony of
religious experiences, then, Swinburne argues that they should not be immediately dismissed as impossible. When
we hear the testimony from Julian of Norwich about what she experienced, we should not dismiss it simply because
of our own pre-judgments about what sorts of experiences are possible. We should not assume that they must be
false.
The historical and scientific methods, however, have processes by which the claims of individuals can be tested,
including their predictive power, their repeatability and their consistency with other facts which have been
established. Often, claims of religious experience, especially special revelations, cannot be tested in this way, so
their credibility as historical claims or scientific claims might not be very strong. However, in reply, we might bring
to mind Gould’s non-overlapping magisteria or Wittgenstein’s language-games and question whether the testimony
was meant to make a historical or scientific claim. If they were not meant to be reliable claims in these AOKs, then
using the rules from those AOKs to judge them might be considered irrelevant.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can there be religious knowledge that is independent from the culture that produces it?
IA prompt
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
14 Does some knowledge belong only to particular communities of knowers?
ACTIVITY
It is rare for people to have religious experiences from a religious tradition outside their own experience.
You wouldn’t expect, for instance, a Hindu living in India to have a vision involving Mary, the mother of
Jesus, an experience which many Christians report.
1 Why do you think this might be?
2 What do you think the consequences are for the reliability of the knowledge gained through such
experiences?
While both general and special revelation might have a huge appeal within religious communities and might be the
source of much of the knowledge of those communities, those who stand outside of them might find very little
reason to accept these revelations. In many cases, of course, this should not pose a problem. If an individual is not
part of a religious community, we wouldn’t expect them to understand or even want to understand the content of
another’s revelations, even if we thought it would be good for them to understand it. However, religious belief more
often than not spills out into wider communities; rarely is it entirely limited to its own community of knowers.
Recently in the United States, there have been a number of laws passed restricting women’s rights to abortion. In the
US, there are strict rules against the publicly elected government promoting or imposing any particular faith
tradition. However, being a representational democracy, where the people elect officials to create, debate and pass
laws on their behalf, many of those representatives are themselves parts of religious communities and will therefore
draw on those traditions and knowledge to guide their own decisions. The Alabama laws restricting abortion were
passed by lawmakers who all profess to be Christians, but who claim not to have written laws based on those beliefs.
(Burke).
While knowledge gained through personal experience, perhaps including revelation through religious experience or
prayer, might be limited in terms of meaning and significance to the particular community of knowers in that
religious tradition, often that knowledge finds its way into other communities who have no connection to that
particular religious tradition. The reliability and credibility of that knowledge gained through religious methods,
then, might find itself being challenged and tested through criteria not accepted within that community. This clash of
knowledge communities creates real challenges for individuals and societies.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Does religion provide a way to systematize concepts of right and wrong?
If religion is intimately connected with ethics, should we expect those with religious knowledge to act
more ethically than those without religious knowledge?
It also provides two other benefits. First, it avoids what we might call a ‘grounding’ problem; that is, it avoids
worries about how to ground our ethical principles. As is the case with the three theories discussed in the
‘Introduction to Ethical Theory’ (which you can access by using the QR code), we might try to ‘ground’ our ethical
principles in either the amount of happiness produced by an action or an appeal to logical consistency or human
autonomy or perhaps an appeal to what we think might be a ‘good’ human character. However, these elements
might be subjective, or relative to a particular society or time or place. Divine command theory avoids this by
grounding what a good action is by simply appealing to the commands of God. God, being the creator and sustainer
of the Universe would also, presumably, have a pretty clear idea about just what actions are ‘good’ or ‘bad’ for all
people all of the time. Secondly, divine command theory provides a very clear reason to be motivated to follow the
moral laws. Again, in relation to the ethical theories we looked at before, we simply might not want to ‘be good’,
especially when being good might actually mean that my own desires and wishes are thwarted by concern for others.
In the case of divine command theory, we are naturally motivated to follow the rules, knowing that following the
rules will promote the chances that we ultimately receive the rewards promised by the religious tradition.
Learner profile
Knowledgeable
What types of knowledge are valued by society? How do political factors affect the value of different
types of knowledge?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What kinds of knowledge inform our political opinions?
The technical meaning of ‘politics,’ the meaning with which you are probably most familiar, is the processes by
which a society develops the rules by which the members will be governed (Heywood). People who take on official
roles in these processes are known as politicians. The methods by which they are assigned to official roles vary
depending on the particular system in place in the society. We will investigate some of the different kinds of
political systems and how they are structured later in the chapter when we consider scope and methods.
Beyond the strictly technical use of the term ‘politics’ to refer to processes of government, the term is used to
describe decision-making hierarchies in other kinds of systems such as businesses, educational systems and
sometimes even organized religions. We can speak of the politics of school administration or the politics of a club or
a sports team.
We can also speak of the politics of knowledge, by which we mean that people in positions of political power, who
have the authority to make decisions, often control what knowledge gets made and disseminated. Politicians, for
example, very often decide what kinds of scientific research gets funded and what does not. As we shall see, those
political forces have a considerable influence on what questions are pursued and answered – and what kinds of
answers are developed and disseminated – and which ones are not.
Because political systems determine rules by which people must live – whether in a greater society or in a smaller
institution – they necessarily wield a great deal of power, and we therefore entrust politicians with that power. Some
people wield their power wisely and benevolently, but history gives us many examples of people who used their
power for their own benefit, ensuring their own wealth and success by exploiting the weaker and poorer.
Because of the potential for the misuse of power by politicians, we very often hear the word ‘politics’ referred to
with a strongly negative connotation. Someone discussing why one person got a promotion while another person
with more experience did not might say ‘that was just politics!’
The suggestion in such a case is that the decision about who got the promotion didn’t have anything to do with
ability or suitability for the position, but instead was to do with some kind of subversive manipulation of the system
– a case of someone in a position of power promoting a friend or ally, regardless of qualifications. Used in situations
such as this, the word ‘politics’ suggests an unethical action taken for the individual good of someone in power.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do our values and assumptions influence the language in which we express our ideas?
As part of this effort, there was a push to halt the common practice of using the pronoun ‘he’ or ‘his’ whenever the
antecedent noun was a generic word which referred to an unidentified person. Instead, people were encouraged to
use ‘his or her’ or ‘him or her’. So instead of writing or saying something like ‘a politician has a lot of power at his
disposal’, there was a shift to ‘a politician has a lot of power at his or her disposal’. That grammatical construction
can get quite unwieldy, however, and there has been a subsequent shift to using ‘their’, the plural pronoun, even
when the antecedent noun is singular.
In the twenty-first century, moreover, language, along with other cultural practices, has been shifting to try to
accommodate people who do not see themselves as being gendered either male or female. In many cases, those
people prefer ‘their’ as the pronoun to be used to refer to them. Hodder Education has adopted this practice as
editorial policy, and so throughout this book, you will see ‘their’ used as the pronoun for any singular human subject
for which the gender – or gender preference – is not known. The developing use of pronouns in English is an
excellent example of how culture influences language and how language influences what we know.
We can see, then, that the idea of politics is a loaded one. Politics does, however, play an essential role in human
experience. We could not get along together without a group of people in leadership positions to help us organize
ourselves, make decisions and mediate conflicts. We will, therefore, investigate the neutral idea of politics as well as
the more controversial one. We shall explore, later in this chapter, the means by which people develop their political
beliefs and values and how those beliefs and values lead to sometimes dramatically different political perspectives.
We will also explore questions about how different political perspectives shape our communal and individual
knowledge.
DEEPER THINKING
Political beliefs vs knowledge
When we talk about knowledge in relation to politics, we can talk about knowledge of political systems,
such as knowing the difference between a democracy, a theocracy, a monarchy and a dictatorship. We
can also talk about knowledge of what actions politicians have taken and what issues are of concern in a
particular society. The study of the facts of political systems and political actions is called political
science. When we want to talk about the ‘knowledge’ that an individual has about what a political system
should be like and what actions politicians should take, we must instead talk about political beliefs.
The determination of what makes for the best political system is fundamentally a matter of opinion.
Because different people have different values (see Concept connection, page 226), they have different
ideas about what the role of government is and what rules should be in place for all people. Because
politics are based on people’s opinions and values, knowledge of politics is not a matter of trying to
discover a reality that exists outside of people. There is no objectively ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ system, although
there are systems which have, over the course of history, come to be widely seen as prone to abuse
and, therefore, not in the best interest of many people. We will explore this process in more detail in the
section on methods that follows.
The scope of the politics of a society or a nation is wide and varied. Political decisions must be made about such
things as health care, education, the economy, international relations, national security (including the military),
infrastructure such as roads, bridges, wireless capacity, water, electricity and human rights. Laws are the expression
of the decisions which politicians make on these matters and all others which affect the members of the community
or nation, so politics is related to the legal system of that community or nation. Political decisions are made for
communities as a whole, but they affect each individual living in that community. The scope of politics therefore
includes everyone and many aspects of everyone’s daily life.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Politics of an institution
Any institution large enough that decisions cannot be made from direct input of all stake-holders has a hierarchy of
decision makers which functions essentially as politics. Community boards, schools and school systems, churches
and religions, military forces and large businesses all require some sort of decision-making hierarchy. The politics of
an institution are essentially the same as the politics of a nation, except that their scope and power are limited to that
institution. We don’t call the decision makers within various non-governmental institutions ‘politicians’: that is a
term that we reserve for the decision makers in governments. The decision makers in other kinds of institutions have
a variety of titles depending upon the institution itself. Titles include Chief Executive Officer, Chair of the Board,
President and Vice-President of companies, Superintendent, Principal, Head of School, Chair of Department, Priest,
Rabbi, Imam, Pujari, Financial Officer, Technology Officer, and so on. Military forces have many titles for their
leadership positions: Commander, Admiral, General, Colonel, Lieutenant, Captain, Major and so on.
ACTIVITY
Think about an organization you belong to – it could be your school, a club or your employer. Answer the
following questions:
1 What political systems are in place within the organization?
2 Could those systems be improved?
3 Where do you feature in the hierarchy?
4 Does understanding the political system in place affect your opinion about the way decisions are
made?
5 How does your personal experience with the politics of an institution help you to understand the scope
of politics?
The kinds of decisions that the ‘politicians’ must make within any given institution, such as a business or an
educational or religious institution, differ considerably from the decisions that a politician makes for a nation. The
scope of the politics of an institution is directly related to the overall function of that institution, though there are
some kinds of decisions which are common to most, if not all, such institutions. Common functions have to do with
hiring practices, financial practices, policies for promotion, hiring and firing and the establishment of the goals and
formal values of the institution. Specific decisions have to do with the specific function of the institution:
educational institutions must make decisions about what constitutes effective educational practice. Religious
ACTIVITY
Discuss with your classmates: What is the scope of politics? Is there any part of our lives which is
unaffected by political forces?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
To what extent are our political views shaped by society, family backgrounds, education or social class?
Haidt and his colleagues do not suggest that any people – whether liberal or conservative – think that some of those
values are not important. Rather, that different people value some more than others. In his book, The Righteous
Mind: Why Good People are Divided by Politics and Religion, Haidt argues that we are born with an innate
disposition to value these things (Haidt 152). Those predispositions are then shaped by our experience as we grow
up. Haidt and his colleagues have developed a profile which shows that conservatives and liberals value these five
things to differing degrees, and that some are more important for people who identify themselves as conservative,
while others are more important for people who identify themselves as liberal: ‘liberals try to create a morality
relying primarily on the Care/harm foundation, with additional support from the fairness/cheating and
liberty/oppression foundations. Conservatives, especially religious conservatives, use all six foundations, including
loyalty/betrayal, authority/subversion, and sanctity/degradation’ (Haidt).
The following graph shows the differences in the way that conservative and liberal people value five of these aspects
of human relations. (In later work, Haidt added a sixth value: liberty vs oppression):
The data on the graph is from data accumulated between 2007 and 2011, involving more than 130 000 subjects
(Haidt 160–1). You can see that people who identify themselves as being liberal or very liberal identify care and
fairness as being extremely important, while people who identify as conservative or very conservative identify
loyalty, authority and sanctity as being very important. In general, liberal people are more tolerant of changes that
allow for more people to have more rights, while conservative people value traditions, security and loyalty to their
group. We can see that no one could reasonably fault anyone for holding these values – they are all positive features
of human experience. The difficulty arises because people care about them to differing degrees, and people make
their political judgments based on what they believe is most important to living a good life. People’s beliefs about
what kinds of decisions politicians should make, in other words, depend on the underlying values that they hold.
ACTIVITY
Investigate how taxes are spent in your country or local area. Are you surprised by your findings? Do
you agree with the way money is distributed?
How does this research help you to understand the values and governmental processes in your country?
If, however, we value loyalty and fairness, we might see these things quite differently. It might not seem fair to us
that we have to pay high income taxes to fund health care and education for people who don’t hold down jobs or
who have many children or who have only been in the country for a few years, while we have been working hard for
many years to educate ourselves and to get jobs with good salaries. Our sense of unfairness might be aggravated if
we perceive that the reason some people can’t hold down jobs is due to their own choices – maybe someone was a
drug addict or had a high-paying job and quit and now can’t find another one. We want to be loyal first to our
families, before we fund services for other people.
If we value caring and the reduction of harm, we might be willing to pay more from our personal income to help
others, but on the other hand, it might seem very unfair that we have to pay for foreign aid or welfare for people who
have not earned their own money. This would be the more conservative viewpoint.
A person with a more liberal viewpoint might argue that it is fair to help people who cannot help themselves,
because they began from a position of innate unfairness – maybe poverty or lack of effective parenting, or the
consequences of problems like Fetal Alcohol Syndrome – all problems which make it much more difficult for
people to achieve a high-quality education and a well-paid job. Neither viewpoint can be said to be ‘correct’; both
are matters for interpretation.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
We can see that in many political situations, there is no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answer. In the best-case scenario,
politicians, and those who contribute to political decision-making in any capacity, are trying to determine the right
thing to do based on human beliefs and opinions, which are not subject to a factual determination of accuracy. My
personal perspective is going to shape my understanding of any decision that politicians make – as well as
determining whether I approve of the decision or not.
ACTIVITY
To learn more about Haidt’s work on Moral Foundations Theory, use the QR code to take a survey to
map your own moral values.
1 Do you think that the result of the survey accurately represents your personal political beliefs? Why or
why not?
2 What does this study help you understand about the basic differences between essentially
conservative and essentially liberal political beliefs?
When we think about how our perspective affects our knowledge of political values, then, we can see that we are
influenced to see six important elements of human experience in certain ways based on the experiences we have in
our lives. We develop emotional attachments to those values in differing degrees. We also form our beliefs about
which values ought to be considered to be the most important when it comes to making decisions about how the
whole group should be treated and how all members of that group should be required to act. It is not easy to get
people to change their fundamental values, which is why so many political decisions are contentious.
Use the QR code to read more about these foundational values on the Moral Foundations Theory website.
CASE STUDY
The Challenger disaster
Sometimes poor decisions are made within an institution because of pressure that is applied by people
who have power, but who lack real knowledge.
In 1986, NASA’s space shuttle Challenger lifted off from Cape Canaveral in Florida and 73 seconds
later, it exploded, killing all seven of the astronauts on board. The night before the scheduled launch, five
engineers who worked for the NASA contractor Morton Thiakol, and who helped design and build the
Shuttle, tried to stop the launch, warning the decision makers that it was not safe to fly the Shuttle in cold
temperatures because the rubber gaskets on the booster rockets wouldn’t seal properly (Berkes).
No one is absolutely certain as to the reasons why the decision makers decided to ignore the warnings
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Culture
In Chapter 1, we considered the definition of ‘culture’ primarily from the perspective of the culture of a
whole country or a whole community. Culture, however, is a concept that can apply in smaller groups as
well. We can talk about the culture of a business, a club or a family. In the Space Shuttle example on the
previous page, we might consider how the culture of NASA as an organization, which is part of the US
government, contributed to the decision-making process. We might consider that the culture of that
organization at that time was one which featured competitiveness with space agencies in other
countries, as well as a culture which featured significant pressure on people doing the actual work to get
the job done quickly. We can, therefore, consider that the politics of an organization can reflect the
culture of the organization.
We can also consider how our individual and group politics are reflections of our culture. Some nations
have democratic systems of government, and the people who grow up in those countries are likely to
have the perspective that a democracy is the best form of politics for a government to have. Other
people live in countries where religion plays a very prominent role in both daily lives and in government,
and those people might have the perspective that a theocracy is the best form of government. Some
examples of theocracies are Saudi Arabia and the Vatican.
Our culture also plays a powerful and integral role in shaping our political beliefs. If you think for a
moment about your own beliefs about what is important in terms of contributing to a quality life, you will
be able to see right away that those beliefs came from your parents, your peers, your religious institution
and your community. When you took Dr Haidt’s survey earlier in this chapter, which of the values did you
think were most important? Probably you felt that all were important to some degree, but if you were
forced to choose, you would pick some over the others. Where did you get those values? Note that
‘values’ are also a TOK course concept, and now you can probably see the relationship between your
cultural experience, what you value, and your political beliefs.
EE links
If you are interested in the relationship between culture and politics, you might want to pursue this topic
further and investigate the question of how the cultural history of a nation has shaped its political system.
You could, for example, choose to write an extended essay about how, historically, cultural attitudes
have kept women from rising to the top political roles in many countries. By 2019, Australia has had only
one female prime minister, the UK has had two, New Zealand has had three female prime ministers and
Canada has had one female prime minister, while the United States has never had a female president or
vice president.
Learner profile
Reflective
How does reflecting on the politics of knowledge help us to understand what it is possible to know?
History
“Who controls the past controls the future; who controls the present controls the past.”
George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four
Politics generally affects knowledge-making on an institutional level, but it is also possible to see how politics can
affect the knowledge that you, personally, can make and how you make it. In his 1949 novel Nineteen Eighty-Four,
George Orwell depicted a futuristic society in which the government exerted rigid control over all information that
was accessible to any member of the society. The government slogan was ‘Who controls the past controls the future;
who controls the present controls the past’ (Orwell 313). In the novel, the Party (the political machine) controlled
the past by altering news reports and photographs so that individual people couldn’t learn anything about the past
that the government didn’t want them to learn. One important reason to know the real past is that it helps us
understand how we came to be what we are today, both individually and as a nation, and so when a past is
constructed deliberately to suit the wishes of the politicians in control, so is the understanding it is possible to have
of the present. Orwell’s vision might seem to be excessive – even apocalyptic; however, attempts to control
information on this scale have occurred in relatively recent history.
Josef Stalin’s efforts to control the knowledge of history that it was possible for citizens of the Soviet Union to have
are widely known. His revisions to historical documents included the doctoring of numerous photographs in order to
remove people who had once been his allies but who had become his enemies: ‘Sometimes, official censors had to
retouch photos over and over again as the list of political enemies grew longer. In one photograph, Stalin is shown
with a group of three of his deputies. As each deputy fell out of his favour, they were snipped out of the photo until
only Stalin remained’ (Blakemore). The original photo is shown below; Stalin is the second from the left. The
second image is of the revised photo, with no one but Stalin left.
Changing historical documents such as photographs results in people who try to learn history from those documents
taking away a completely wrong understanding of historical events. We know now what Stalin tried to do, because
in the years following the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991, Stalin’s secrets became known to the rest of the world
and original documents were recovered. Many people, however, lived their entire lives during Stalin’s rule, and
those who lived beyond it had to relearn the history of their country.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Education
The deliberate rewriting of history is an extreme example of how politics can shape people’s knowledge. As we
have already seen, politics very often determines what knowledge is pursued because of the allocation of funding.
That process also naturally affects what individuals can know. If knowledge doesn’t get developed, it isn’t available
to be learned.
One of the most significant ways that politics can help or hinder individuals’ knowledge is by the control over who
has access to education. The provision of education is a significant decision that must be made in virtually every
modern society. If education is an entirely private venture, for which individual people have to pay, then only the
wealthy can afford to educate their children. If the government is going to provide education for everyone, then the
problem becomes how to pay for it and whether the same education can be provided to everyone. In trying to make
that decision, politicians must take into account many different perspectives.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
With regards to politics, do we know as much as we think we know?
How can we know whether we have sufficient knowledge before voting in an election?
Schools
In the United States, for example, the goal is to provide publicly funded education for everyone. A portion of the
funding comes from the federal government, and a portion comes from the state governments. Trying to determine
how much money will be spent requires a consideration of how many school-aged children there are in any given
state, how much money each state can afford to provide (some states being poorer than others) and so on. A very
common problem is that areas with a high percentage of low-income families end up with school systems which are
underfunded. If one school can provide all the students with access to laptop computers, fully-stocked science labs
and up-to-date equipment for health and physical education, and another school in another city or state can only
provide five computers in the library (or none), a science lab with only four microscopes and no access to lab
specimens for dissection, and jumping ropes and balls for physical education but no weight machines or monitors
for heart rate and counting steps, then the kind of education that the students will get is very different.
In many countries, such as the United States, Canada and the UK, families who can afford to do so can send their
children to schools which are privately funded, which means that they are not funded by the government. In some
cases, private primary and secondary schools are very well funded, and, because parents pay high fees, can provide
many more resources than public schools can. It is sometimes the case, therefore, that people who can afford these
schools can get a better education than people who must rely on state-funded schools for their education. At any
rate, in any system where there are both publicly and privately funded schools, the systems are inherently different,
and which one you attend shapes what you can learn.
Learner profile
Caring
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
How might knowledge of inequalities in a country’s educational system contribute to our ability to take
action in the world?
Historically, inequalities in school systems have sometimes been based in an overtly racist political situation.
Official government policies, such as the Jim Crow era ‘separate but equal’ laws in the United States and apartheid
in South Africa, meant that white children had access to much better funded schools than black children had access
to. During the Jim Crow era, the races were certainly separated, but they were not, despite the claim in the slogan,
by any means provided with equal facilities or resources. Black schools were often housed in old, run-down
buildings and lacked books and other materials. Carter G. Woodson, one of the first scholars to study African
American history ‘… told how some black children in southern schools were not allowed to use books that included
the Declaration of Independence or the US Constitution’ (Brooker). Although in both of those countries the laws
have been changed, the inequalities are often still reflected in the poverty of some cities and neighbourhoods.
One more important political factor that shapes what young people can learn in schools has to do with the fact that
every school system must decide what content should be taught. One decision to be made is which subjects will be
offered. If you go to a school where, say, Chinese is not taught, then you won’t be able to gain knowledge of
Chinese, unless you take it upon yourself to find a private Chinese language school. Perhaps your IB Programme
offers philosophy but not psychology, or biology and chemistry but not physics. All of these choices, which can be
seen as political at least to the degree that there are decision makers who have the power of choice for everyone, and
to the degree that money is involved in the decision, shape what it is possible for you to study.
A second, less obvious decision that must be made is what content will be taught within the courses that have been
chosen. No secondary school in Canada could, for example, teach everything there is to know about Canadian
history. High school calculus can only cover so many topics over the course of a year. What are the most important
topics to be taught in physics? Someone has to make choices, and each system has a different means of determining
course content.
One powerful influence on what will be taught in any given class is the production of textbooks. Textbook
publishers cannot afford to publish many different textbooks for many different situations, schools or states, so each
publisher usually has only one textbook for each level of each subject. Depending on how many textbook publishers
there are in any country, school systems are limited to a very few choices of which book to buy.
For the last Theory of Knowledge curriculum, for instance, there were several choices of textbooks for the TOK
course, including the Hodder book which preceded this edition, a book published by Oxford University Press, a
book published by Cambridge University Press and a book published by Pearson. All the books were written for the
published IB curriculum, but the authors of each one determined what aspects of the curriculum should be featured
prominently and how to explain each of the ideas that would be included in the course. Each book was, therefore,
different from all the others. Different schools chose different books, and some schools chose no books. Students at
those different schools, therefore, had access to different ideas about what was important knowledge in Theory of
Knowledge.
In the case of Theory of Knowledge, the differences in the books seemed to be relatively minor. No large political
interest group got involved in trying to determine what could or could not be included in the TOK books. For many
textbooks, however, different groups of people have very strong opinions about what should and should not be
taught. These groups sometimes get involved in lobbying textbook companies to have certain information included
or excluded from student textbooks. If they are successful, then those textbooks are what are available to everyone,
even in places where the community and the school officials wish to teach the excluded information.
One topic which is often the target of special-interest groups is the teaching of evolution. In 2016,
Biology textbooks in Alabama schools in the US were still required to include a sticker with a message to
students which claimed that evolution is a ‘controversial theory’ supported by ‘some scientists’
(Schlanger). You can use the QR code to read the entire statement which is presented to students in
that state who take biology.
Opponents of the use of such stickers are concerned that they harm students’ understanding of both
science and of religion (Glaze).
Anti-evolution sentiment, in fact, extends well beyond the political pressure put on textbooks. In India, in
2018, the Minister for Higher Education, Satyapal Singh, called for the removal of evolution from
schools, claiming that Darwin’s work is ‘scientifically wrong’ (Dixon). In Turkey, claims have been made
that evolution cannot be taught because it is beyond the ability of secondary students to understand,
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
while in Israel teachers were claiming that there is pressure from the education ministry to teach subjects
other than evolution in biology (Dixon). All of these examples demonstrate the effects of political
decision-making on the personal knowledge of individuals through the influence those decisions have on
the educational process in any given country.
ACTIVITY
Consider the political decision-making in your country. How does it affect what people can learn in
schools and can, therefore, know?
1 Do you think that people of all races are treated the same way in terms of their education?
2 Do you think that immigrants have access to the same kind of education that native-born citizens do?
3 Do you think that young women get the same kind of education as young men?
4 Is there a different educational path for students who wish to go to college and students who wish to
go into a trade or into the military?
5 Can all students at your school choose to study the IB curriculum? Are all students at your school
required to study the IB curriculum?
6 Do you think that such differences are always necessarily negative? Why or why not?
Learner profile
Principled
What principles should underlie the creation and implementation of an educational system?
CAS links
If you are interested in finding out more about how educational decision making takes place in your
community, you could organize a field trip to the nearest state-run education office. You could arrange
for an official to make a presentation to you and your classmates about the process that is used in your
area for determining what curriculum is to be taught in your schools.
Higher education
Access to higher education is also often influenced by political factors. In China, access to higher education is
determined by the gaokao, an examination which students must pass to be eligible for university. When it was first
developed in 1952, under the rule of Mao, only students who were seen to be sufficiently communist could apply to
take the exam (Qin and Hernández). In the twenty-first century, the test is available to many more people and is
perceived as offering opportunity to anyone who is willing to work hard enough; however, it can also be seen as a
‘tool of social control’ (Qin and Hernández), which happens because those who benefit from the education are
expected to acquiesce with government policies. One mother, who dropped out of school herself, has big dreams for
her son, who will, she thinks, raise the family out of poverty.
To achieve all this, Ms Gong and millions of other Chinese like her have an unspoken bargain with the
ruling Communist Party. The government promises a good life to anyone who works hard, even the
children of peasants. In exchange, they stay out of politics, look away when protesters climb onto rooftops
to denounce the forced demolition of their homes, and accept the propaganda posters plastered across the
city. (Qin and Hernandez)
Interestingly, in terms of how politics influences knowledge, because the gaokao is now seen as offering pretty fair
opportunities for anyone who wants to take it, even those students who fail the exam do not complain about the
politics of their country. The blame for failure rests on the students who, as they see it, simply did not work hard
enough.
Information sharing
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Another example of how politics can influence knowledge reveals how, depending on the political goals of a
government, knowledge can be deliberately kept from the public, even when the public has paid, through taxes, for
that knowledge to be gathered or developed.
CASE STUDY
Climate change
Global climate change has been a politically contentious topic for some years, because the cost of
engaging in a dedicated effort to combat climate change is quite high. Those costs include the money
that would have to be expended to develop new technologies as well as the costs to businesses and
industries of modifying their factories and changing their practices for things like disposing of waste.
Some political groups place the value of caring for the environment higher than the value of promoting
business profits, while others believe that free enterprise and capitalism are of greater value.
In recent years, this clash of beliefs has led to dramatic changes in policies regarding the sharing of
information about global climate change with the public. In September 2016, for example, under
President Barack Obama’s administration, the United States joined the Paris Accord, a multi-national
agreement to commit to an effort to keeping global warming below 2° C in this century, as well as
participating in other efforts to cope with the effects of climate change (‘The Paris Agreement’). You can
read the text of the Paris Agreement using the QR code.
In signing the accord and committing the US to meeting the standards it lays out, Obama said this:
One of the reasons I ran for this office was to make sure that America does its part to protect
this planet for future generations. Over the past seven and a half years, we’ve transformed the
United States into a global leader in the fight against climate change. (Somanader)
Obama states directly that protecting the planet was a political goal under his administration. Just a few
months later, however, after Donald Trump’s election in November 2016, there was a dramatic change
to the political values guiding the decision making in Washington. Under the new administration,
significant changes were made to the Environmental Protection Agency. Environmental protections
passed by previous administrations were rolled back, and Trump’s White House withdrew the United
States from the Paris Accord (Davenport and Landler). The Trump administration has also put into place
regulations about what information about climate change can and cannot be released to the public:
the White House-appointed director of the United States Geological Survey, James Reilly, a
former astronaut and petroleum geologist, has ordered that scientific assessments produced by
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
that office use only computer-generated climate models that project the impact of climate
change through 2040, rather than through the end of the century, as had been done previously.
(Davenport and Landler)
While this limitation on what knowledge can be disseminated seems, at first glance, to be fairly
innocuous, the implications are actually pretty significant, as the models show that the greatest effects
of climate change will occur after the year 2040 (Davenport and Landler). By limiting the models to the
years in which the effects of climate change are likely to be the least problematic, the government is
ensuring that people do not hear about the most devastating consequences.
The United States is not the only country with a government which has taken active steps to stop the
spread of knowledge about global climate change. In Canada, when Prime Minister Stephen Harper
consolidated power in 2011 with the election of more members of the Conservative Party to Parliament,
his administration set in place specific new rules denying government scientists the right to speak
directly to the press. All requests for information about climate change had to go through a special media
centre which dealt with those communications. Often responses were stalled until the reporters’
deadlines were past (Learn). Other times, they were simply tied up in a long back-and-forth of emails. In
one case, a request by a reporter from The Canadian Press to speak with Max Bothwell, a government
scientist with Environment Canada, an environmental watchdog, was bogged down in what ultimately
turned out to be 110 pages of emails involving 16 different government agencies (Learn). The reasons
for the change to regulations in Canada were based on the fact that Harper’s administration opposed
spending money to fight climate change and favoured developing energy resources:
Early on in his administration, Harper boasted that Canada would become an ‘energy
superpower’ built on the growth of the Athabasca oil sands in the western part of the country.
This oil-rich region would subsequently become a driving economic force for the country, until
low global oil prices caused the loonie (the Canadian dollar) to crash. Climate change science –
and environmental regulations – posed a hindrance to that ambitious vision. (Learn)
Harper’s political goals were different from the goals of the government which preceded him, and the
decisions that he and his administration made resulted in a change to the knowledge readily available to
the Canadian public.
Both of these examples show how the values which underlie political decision making influence the kind and
amount of knowledge which is available to the public.
This kind of influence of politics on knowledge is not, of course, particular only to the United States and Canada.
Politicians must make choices between options – indeed, that is their function in a government. Whichever choice
they make will have consequences in terms of what knowledge does get made and disseminated and what does not.
Therefore, all countries in which politicians make decisions for the populace at large will experience the fact that
those political decisions affect the way that knowledge gets made and distributed within that country.
Funding
A final way in which politics influences knowledge has to do with funding. Much of our knowledge is developed by
professionals – biologists, psychologists, mathematicians and so on. These people are almost without exception
employed either by the government, by universities or by private industries. As employees, they are not free to do
whatever work they want to do. Rather, they do the work that their employer is willing to pay for.
ACTIVITY
Can you think of examples in your country of how political decision making has resulted in your having
access to either more or less knowledge of a particular subject?
CASE STUDY
Alan Turing
ACTIVITY
Identify one time in your country’s history when there was a change in the political system. This change
might be a dramatic one, such as the adoption of a constitution, or it might be a simpler one, such as a
shift from a more conservative government to a more liberal one. Identify the events and values that led
to that change in the political system.
CASE STUDY
Saudi Arabia
Saudi Arabia is an absolute monarchy. During the twentieth century, there was considerable talk about
moving the country toward a constitutional monarchy, and several documents were drafted over the
years which could have formed the basis for such an arrangement. However, none of these plans came
to anything, and the current monarch, Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman (commonly known as MBS)
has firmly denounced any such plans. Saudi Arabian Abdullah Alaoudh, writing for The Washington Post
in July 2018, had this to say:
The change of mind-set with MBS toward embracing eternal absolute power marks a dramatic
shift from past democratic promises that offered some hope for the future, even though none of
them were ever fulfilled. The new Saudi administration has gained positive press for its futuristic
rhetoric, including talk of a robotically manned city, and for allowing women to drive. But make
no mistake: We are witnessing a return to Saudi Arabia’s past. In abandoning the promise of
democracy, the crown prince may actually be on his way to making Saudi Arabia more
medieval than ever. (Alaoudh)
The history of the politics of Saudi Arabia reveals the fact that when a nation has a leader with absolute
power, it requires the cooperation, and possibly the active leadership of that monarch, to move the
country toward something more democratic, regardless of what the political beliefs of the people of that
society may be.
History is full of examples, however, of people rising up in revolution to overthrow an absolute ruler who refused to
make any such changes. The American Revolution which began in 1776 is one such example and resulted in a new
IA prompt
33 How is current knowledge shaped by its historical development?
Knowledge about the history of politics is made by historians, using the methods of history, which you will read
about in Chapter 11.
The repeal of this law doesn’t have much significance in terms of day-to-day life in India, as no one uses hackney
carriages anymore. Another law which was repealed in these acts, however, has more interesting ramifications. The
bill repealed the ‘Dramatic Performance Act’ of 1876, which outlawed theatrical performances because they were
being used as protests against British rule (PTI). Since theatrical performances are certainly being given in India in
the twenty-first century, some or all of these performances may be technically in violation of the law. Formally
repealing the law means that no one can try to challenge a theatrical performance they don’t like using that 1876 law
as the basis for the suit. The process in this case was the normal process for passing laws in the Indian Parliament.
This process is typical of countries in which there is a representative government.
In the case of governments with absolute monarchies or dictatorships, the process of knowledge-making is quite
different. In those cases, the leader determines what is to be permissible and what is not, and their decree is
sufficient to establish law. The common term for ‘laws’ in these nations is ‘edict’. There are no procedures for
repealing edicts. In North Korea, for example, an edict was issued in 1972 which is called the ‘Three Generations of
Punishment’ rule. Under this edict, if a person is convicted of a crime which results in his being sent to a prison
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
camp, his entire family and all members of the next two generations can be sent to the prison camp as well (Wright
and Urban). As of 2017, this rule was still in place.
The laws and edicts of any country function as the embodiment of beliefs about what is right and what is wrong and
about how things should be. This fact accounts for the controversy that often surrounds the proposal and passage of
laws. Consider, for example, the emotional debate over gun control laws, particularly in the United States. The fight
stems from disagreements such as whether it is right for individuals to be able to own even military-grade weaponry,
as well as being about what kind of society should exist.
One very familiar role that the legal system of a government plays at any level is to determine (ie, to make
knowledge of) whether or not a person has broken a law. How this process works differs somewhat from country to
country, but it generally involves lawyers, witnesses, evidence, a judge and, often, a jury. The decision is very often
communally made.
ACTIVITY
1 Working with several of your classmates, each of you choose a country and do some research about
how laws are made in that country and then compare notes.
2 Remember that the process of making laws is a process of making knowledge, since the resulting
laws are knowledge claims. How do these processes shape the kind of knowledge that is possible in
each country?
Another very significant function of the legal system, however, is to hear challenges to laws which someone or some
people feel violate the higher law of the constitution of the state, province or nation. As we saw, in the case of
dictatorships or absolute monarchies, there is no process for launching this sort of appeal. In other countries,
however, where the governmental structure includes a system of checks and balances, courts do take up the question
of whether some laws are legal according to the higher authority, and ought, therefore to be allowed to stand, or
whether those laws violate the constitution, and must therefore be struck down. Knowledge of whether a law is fair
or not, in other words, lies with the court system in many instances.
Sometimes the process of challenging a law on legal grounds can be quite tricky for the courts, because situations
and facts that did not exist previously now require new thinking about the implications of the constitution. In the
United States, for example, a group of young people filed a suit in 2015 to require the government to combat
human-caused climate change on the grounds that such change violates young people’s ‘constitutional right to a
clean environment’. By early 2019, the courts had been denying government challenges requesting that the suit be
dropped, but in June 2019, a new challenge from the government claimed that there is no constitutional right to a
stable environment and that the lawsuit brought by the young people is an effort to get around the separation of
powers that is a fundamental aspect of US government. The latest challenge claims that the students are asking the
courts to take on the job which normally belongs to the legislature by asking it to make new law (Dennis).
This particular case gives us a very interesting example of trying to make knowledge in politics, because the
fundamental question in this latest challenge is about where the line is between applying existing law to new facts
and creating new law. In the US, it is not the job of the courts to make new law. It is the job of the courts to perform
the check of new situations against existing law. In this example, the government is claiming that the student suit
requires new law to be made, while the lawyer for the students says, specifically, ‘We’re asking the court to apply
bedrock constitutional law and principles to a wholly new set of facts’ (Dennis). The first question which needs to
be decided is who actually has the right to make the knowledge needed in this instance: the legislature or the courts.
DEEPER THINKING
The foundations of present-day law making
Notice that the entire system of making, testing and repealing laws rests on the honesty and integrity of
those responsible for applying the procedures. The constitution, or other underlying document of any
country, was written, at some point in history, by people who committed to trying to establish the
guidelines by which all future decisions would be made. The constitution was then ratified, or approved,
by some significant portion of the people who were alive at that time. A constitution is, therefore, an
agreement made by specific people and by which all ensuing people have agreed to abide, unless
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
formal amendment is made to it. All laws written and tested since the adoption of a constitution are
required to comply with the constitution, and the legal system is the means by which the constitutionality
of any given law can be tested.
We depend, in a very fundamental way, on politicians, lawyers and judges to act in accordance with their
vows to uphold the constitution or other foundational document. The power, in other words, of a
constitution to express what we know about what can and cannot be done in any given nation, depends
on people abiding by it. If people in the present day simply decide that they are not going to operate
within the rules as set out in a constitution, and if the people who are responsible for legal decisions
decide that they are not going to hold others to the rules as set out in the constitution, a constitution has
no power at all. Since we must put great faith in those we choose to represent us, we might argue that
all individuals have a responsibility both to educate themselves about the people who would represent
them and to participate in the electoral process of choosing those representatives.
ACTIVITY
Do some research and find out how many bills have been considered by your local legislature so far this
year. You can choose to investigate either for your city or town or for your state or province. If you
cannot find the information on the internet, you can probably telephone your local legislator’s office to
find out how you can gain access to that information. Make a list of general topics that the politicians
have been considering recently.
1 How many different bills have been considered?
2 How many different topics have come before the legislature for your local politicians to make
decisions about?
3 How would you characterize the knowledge that your local politicians must have in order to perform
their jobs well?
4 Which of the topics under consideration would you have sufficient knowledge about to be able to
make responsible decisions for your community? How did you acquire that knowledge?
5 If you wanted to know more about the topics you don’t have a lot of knowledge about, how would you
go about learning what you need to know?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is being knowledgeable an important quality in a political leader?
Depending on their role, politicians who have responsibility over larger geographical regions need to have
knowledge about all these topics for that larger region and many more. At national levels, politicians have to be
concerned about the need for such larger issues as military services, diplomacy with other nations, immigration
policy, global warming and human rights. They may have to concern themselves with problems faced by other
countries, because those problems have consequences which affect the home country. Peace in the Middle East, for
instance, becomes a significant issue for many other nations in the world, because if the severely troubled
relationship between Israel and Palestine cannot be resolved, many other nations may find themselves ultimately
drawn into, or at least significantly concerned with the dangers of, a war between those two groups.
Just as worldwide concerns can expand to draw in individual nations who would not appear to be immediately
affected by them, national and international concerns can become significant local problems as well. In nations
where immigration has come to be a vital national concern, places in those nations in which immigrants settle must
deal with immigration questions locally, such as how to provide for the education and health care of immigrants. If
there is a large body of illegal immigrants in a city, state or province, how will that locality address that issue? Will
the local authority offer the immigrants asylum in their area? What are the effects on the economy of a number of
immigrants settling in a particular place? Similarly, in localities in which the effects of global warming are likely to
be extensive or even catastrophic, politicians in those localities must learn about the issue and must involve
themselves in trying to solve the problem.
In addition to needing to know facts about all these various topics, politicians at all levels must have a set of
coherent political beliefs (more on this in the Ethics section below), upon which they can base their decisions. All of
this knowledge is ultimately made by each individual. The methods that they use are the same methods that you, or
any other individual, can use to make political knowledge, and we will investigate these in the next section.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
With regards to politics, do we know as much as we think we know?
Why do facts sometimes not change our minds?
ACTIVITY
Use the QR code to visit the website for the Political Compass. You can take a survey on that site, and it
will produce for you a profile of your political views based on your answers to a number of questions.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
After you take the survey, answer these questions:
1 Do you think that the questions you were asked were relevant to revealing your political views?
2 Do you agree with the result of the analysis of your answers? Why or why not?
3 Do you think that categorizing people’s political views in this way is useful? Why or why not?
IA prompt
6 How does the way that we organize or classify knowledge affect what we know?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
To what extent can polls provide reliable knowledge and accurate predictions?
After university, political scientists work in a variety of careers related to politics, including serving as policy
analysts, legislative assistants, consultants working on political campaigns and so on. Some political scientists work
on administering polls to gather information about people’s political beliefs and concerns as well as on analysing the
data gathered in these polls. Results of the polls – knowledge of public opinion – can be used by politicians to shape
their policies and it can be used by news media to convey to the public information about how a campaign is
progressing.
Individual citizens
People who live in societies with governmental systems that require the participation of the citizenry need to keep
themselves informed about current political events so that they can make good decisions when they vote. Voters
need to be aware of which political issues play a central role at any given time, and they need to know what is
involved in those issues. In some communities, for example, immigration might be of concern. In others, the need to
improve education might be of pressing importance, while in still others, the problem of ensuring that all community
members have clean water might be the most important issue of the day. Of course, all communities will have
multiple needs, and decisions about which politicians to vote for will be based on those politicians’ stances on
multiple issues.
In order to find out what politicians intend to do, once in office, about the various problems that concern a
community, individuals need to educate themselves. Often communities will provide for formal means by which that
education can take place: groups or organizations will arrange forums in which politicians can answer questions
from members of the public or engage in debates. Politicians have organizations working on their behalf which will
publish formal statements of policy. In the present day, these policy platforms are often published on the internet.
People who desire to learn more about any given politician’s policies can seek out that information on those
websites.
Some sites track the votes of individual politicians and some track the votes of individual bills. There are many
others besides the ones we have offered here; if you want to know more about how politicians vote in your country,
you should have no trouble finding many online resources.
However, social media increasingly has become a forum in which people exchange ideas about politics. Twitter and
Facebook have been popular forums in the past few years on which people post their personal political views.
Politicians, too, have taken to posting on social media, which has the power to reach many people in a very short
amount of time.
People who are interested in learning about contemporary political issues, therefore, have many resources at their
disposal in order to be able to do so. The problem is that these social media platforms are available for people to post
to with little or no restraint. This means that not only can people post whatever they want (which may be true or
not), but they can also do so while hiding their true selves behind a fake identity. The reader of the posts has no way
of determining whether the person posting the message has an ulterior motive. You saw, in Chapter 3, how
algorithms are used to determine what appears on your Facebook and Twitter feeds, which results in people having
little or no exposure to ideas other than those they already have. If you have a particular political belief, then, and
you post a few things that express that belief, the technology will begin funnelling your way other posts which are
like the ones you posted. Included in those posts are likely to be some statements which are not true – either because
the person posting them didn’t bother to check and passed on what they just assumed was accurate – or because the
person posting them deliberately lied. If you do not check the accuracy of the posts that you read, you will likely
begin believing things which are not true.
IA prompt
24 How might the context in which knowledge is presented influence whether it is accepted or rejected?
The problem for knowledge and the internet, and especially for social media, however, is that we are no longer
dealing just with experts. If someone who is not an expert in building a computer tries to build one, and someone
else who is not an expert in programming that computer tries to program it, it simply will not work. We are not,
therefore, in any real danger of being misled by the lack of expertise. If someone who is not an expert in politics – or
any other subject – posts a claim on the internet, however, it looks just like a post by an expert would look. Finding
out whether posts on social media are like broken computers requires a completely different kind of mental work
from what we have been used to, and most of us have not been alerted to the need for the work, nor have we been
given the tools to do that work. Thus, people who have been used to trusting what they hear, go right on trusting it,
and false information spreads rapidly on the internet.
ACTIVITY
Evaluate your own personal use of social media.
1 Which platforms do you rely on the most?
2 Are there people whose posts you just believe without checking their validity?
3 Why are those people trustworthy?
4 Have you seen a post on social media that was clearly untrue? How often does this happen?
5 How often do you take steps to find out whether what you are seeing online is true? What steps do
you take?
CAS links
You could organize a survey of classmates or a school-wide survey to collect information about how
much students rely on social media and how often they check the validity of the information that they see
In recent years, another problem has arisen, particularly with regard to political ‘information’ on social media: bots.
Bots are automated programs that run on the internet and they can act like people. They can post things to Facebook
accounts, for example, and they can be programmed to post whatever the person who programs them wants. They
are, therefore, a particularly powerful tool for manipulating people with false information.
Bots were unleashed on consumers in the United States through Twitter and Facebook during the 2016 election to
spread false information, in an effort, apparently, to influence the election. Studies have been ongoing in an effort to
try to figure out just how much false information was spread and whether it did actually have an impact on the
outcome of the election. The extent of the problem is still not known, but in early 2018, Twitter admitted that more
than 50 000 Russian-linked accounts were used to post automated material to Twitter (Swaine).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What impact has social media had on how we acquire and share political knowledge?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Power
We can see from this situation that technology gives unscrupulous people power to persuade people
who are unaware of the ways in which technology can be manipulated, especially because of the human
tendency to believe what we hear. Anyone who tries to learn about politicians and politics from social
media, and who does not take the extra step of checking what they read against other sources to see if
they support each other, runs the risk of being manipulated by someone who has a particular interest in
one certain outcome. The same is true of anyone who doesn’t analyse what they read carefully and
thoughtfully in order to determine whether it is plausible and logical. The people using the technology in
such an unscrupulous way wield it to gain power over others, and they don’t care whether that outcome
is good for the readers of those posts or not.
Consumers can take the power back, but they have to do it consciously, by taking the extra step of
checking the accuracy of what they read. This is one of the important aims of Theory of Knowledge: to
arm you with the tools to do that so that you have the power of your own opinions, and you do not cede it
to someone else.
ACTIVITY
Choose a politician in your community, state, province or country. Work with some classmates to locate
some good resources for finding out what politicians claim and what they actually do. Use the QR code
to see one example of many.
Many politicians also have an individual webpage on which they publish their platform and beliefs. Look
up the policy claims that that politician made when they were running for election. Compare those claims
with the actual voting record of that politician. Do their actions reflect the early promises?
We have been looking at ways in which individuals can try to educate themselves about contemporary political
issues. For a more extensive and more formal understanding of politics, however, students at university can make
political science the subject for their degree.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Problems of knowledge in politics
The methods of making knowledge in politics are similar to the methods of human scientists, which you will study
in more detail in Chapter 10. When the person making knowledge is a political scientist administering a poll, for
example, they are functioning as a human scientist. When the person is not a trained political scientist, but is, rather,
a person such as yourself, a member of a society who simply wants to know more about the politics of the region
and the day, the methods are much less formal. Both methods, however, pose significant problems for trying to
develop certain knowledge.
You will learn more about the problems of the methodology of the human sciences in Chapter 10; however, we will
look at one example here in order to demonstrate the kind of difficulty that political scientists face in trying to make
knowledge.
Polling
Polling is an important means of collecting information about people’s political beliefs and priorities. Ideally, when
a poll is administered, the people who respond to it are a perfect representation of the whole range of people in the
society in which they live, in terms of race, age, gender, economic status, profession and so on.
Statisticians can determine how many people are needed for a poll to be considered representative of the larger
community. Ideally too, the questions used in the poll are constructed carefully so that they are perfectly unbiased
and do not lead people to provide particular answers. The accuracy of the polling results depend on the statistical
reliability, but they also depend on whether or not the people responding to the poll have told the truth.
In the United States, the polling leading to the 2016 presidential election was notoriously misleading. Virtually all
the polling before election day showed with a high degree of certainty that Hillary Clinton would win, but, of
course, she did not. No one knows for certain why the polling was so far off; however, the Pew Research Center, a
non-partisan ‘fact tank’ that develops and provides information on a variety of public issues, has suggested a number
of possible reasons for the fact that the polls failed to give the public an accurate picture of people’s opinions. These
include (Mercer, et al):
• ‘Nonresponse bias’: the failure of certain kinds of people to respond to polls. In the case of the 2016 presidential
race, people may not have wanted to admit to supporting a man who was seen by so many people as being anti-
social.
• Dishonesty on the part of people responding to the polls.
• Problems identifying ‘likely voters’ – the polls try to target people who will actually vote, and problems in the
models of how to identify those people might have slanted the results.
The problem of inaccurate polls has not been limited to the United States. Polls also failed to accurately predict the
outcome of the British general election in 2015 (Mercer, et al). Pollsters are aware of the significant problems that
can arise from the false representation of people’s attitudes during elections, since the polling can, itself, cause
people to decide that there is no need to vote (if they think that their candidate is ‘safely ahead’ or ‘impossibly
behind). The Pew Research Center has this to say on the matter:
Pollsters are well aware that the profession faces serious challenges that this election has only served to
highlight. But this is also a time of extensive experimentation and innovation in the field. The role of
polling in a democracy goes far beyond simply predicting the horse race. At its best, polling provides an
equal voice to everyone and helps to give expression to the public’s needs and wants in ways that elections
may be too blunt to do. That is why restoring polling’s credibility is so important, and why we are
committed to helping in the effort to do so. (Mercer, et al)
IA prompt
10 What challenges are raised by the dissemination and/ or communication of knowledge?
Lying politicians
Whether or not people are telling the truth is a question which poses another problem for anyone trying to learn
about the beliefs and attitudes of politicians. Politicians themselves do not necessarily tell the truth. Sometimes the
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
desire to win a seat or to keep a seat drives politicians and their campaigns to say what they think their followers
want to hear, or to dodge questions with vague answers, rather than to take the risk of telling an unpleasant truth and
alienating their would-be supporters. Non-partisan organizations have been created in order to keep track of the
accuracy of the statements that various politicians make.
In Canada, one such organization is FactsCan. You can scan the QR code to visit their webpage to see the latest facts
they have been checking.
In the US, the main fact-checking organization is PolitiFact. Scan the top QR code on the right to visit their site.
In Britain, FullFact, whose website can be seen by scanning the second QR code, is a non-partisan fact-checking
charity.
The kinds of falsehoods we have seen in recent years have taken a variety of forms. One problem is that politicians
sometimes say different things to different audiences. President Donald Trump, for example, regularly changes his
claims about global warming. In 2012, Mr Trump famously tweeted that global warming is a hoax created by the
Chinese. You can read his tweet by scanning the third QR code on the right.
Once he became president, however, his story tended to change. On some occasions, particularly when addressing
his ‘base’ – his strongest supporters – he claims that there is no such thing as global warning, or even claims that we
need more global warming. In December 2018, he tweeted, ‘Perhaps we could use a little bit of that good old Global
Warming that our Country, but not other countries, was going to pay TRILLIONS OF DOLLARS to protect
against’. In other situations, while speaking to people who accept the fact that science has definitively tied global
climate change to human activity, Mr Trump changes his claims. In an interview with the New York Times in 2016,
Trump said that he did believe there was some relationship between human activity and climate change (Meyer).
This kind of misrepresentation of facts is not, of course, limited to US politics. In the run up to the Brexit vote in
2016, a now-notorious advertisement was painted on the side of a bus:
IA prompt
4 On what grounds might we doubt a claim?
Fake news
The examples we have been looking at are instances of what has come to be known as ‘fake news’. In both of these
cases, the claims being made were actually false. In other cases, however, real claims have been labelled as ‘fake
news’ by people who don’t like the claims and wish to convince others to ignore them. For the purposes of Theory
of Knowledge, the fact that the term ‘fake news’ has arisen makes the important point that enough false information
is now being spread through various news media to require the development of a term to name the phenomenon. If
you are trying to develop your knowledge of politics, you must be alert to the fact that some of what you are getting
is, indeed, fake news, and you must develop strategies for trying to tell the difference between fake news and real
news.
Confirmation bias
The problem of the existence of fake news is further aggravated by the problem of confirmation bias, which is the
tendency we have to listen to and believe reports that back up what we already believe to be true, rather than being
open to having our minds changed. This tendency, in fact, contributes to the problem of fake news, because if the
fake report tells us what we already believe or want to believe, we are very unlikely to check the facts. Even if the
facts are given to us, it is easier to discount the facts than to change our minds.
Many studies have demonstrated how difficult it is to get people to change their minds, and one explanation for this
fact is that we have evolved to live in communities. Living and working in communities means that we rely on each
other to get things done: I don’t have to know how my computer works, because you designed it and someone else
built it. I have learned to trust you and the others who built the computer – or my car or the roads or the airplane in
which I took my trip to Madagascar last summer. I have become used to relying on the knowledge of others.
This kind of trust, however, becomes a problem when it comes to dealing with politics, social media and fake news.
Cognitive scientists Steven Sloman, at Brown University, and Philip Fernbach, at the University of Colorado, have
described the problem:
‘This is how a community of knowledge can become dangerous’, Sloman and Fernbach observe … In a
study conducted in 2012, they asked people for their stance on questions like: Should there be a single-
payer health-care system? Or merit-based pay for teachers? Participants were asked to rate their positions
depending on how strongly they agreed or disagreed with the proposals. Next, they were instructed to
explain, in as much detail as they could, the impacts of implementing each one. Most people at this point
ran into trouble. Asked once again to rate their views, they ratcheted down the intensity, so that they either
agreed or disagreed less vehemently.
Sloman and Fernbach see in this result a little candle for a dark world. If we – or our friends or the pundits
on CNN – spent less time pontificating and more trying to work through the implications of policy
proposals, we’d realize how clueless we are and moderate our views. This, they write, ‘may be the only
form of thinking that will shatter the illusion of explanatory depth and change people’s attitudes’.
(Kolbert)
Consider the following scenario: If I trust you when you tell me that global warming is not a real problem, and your
knowledge of global warming is not well-founded, then my opinion of global warming is now also not well-
founded. If I tell my friend that global warming is not a problem, and my friend believes me, then my friend’s
opinion is also not well-founded. Thus, badly formed political opinions can spread rapidly. No one checked the
facts, because everyone trusted their source. Actual facts, if they are subsequently presented, don’t carry any weight,
because if I were to believe the facts, I would have to accept that my friend didn’t tell me the truth.
We have seen that humans are genetically engineered to cooperate and to trust the knowledge of others. We have not
developed a capacity to reason that works against our deeply ingrained trust of the people we depend upon to make
our lives run smoothly.
If you want to ensure that your political knowledge is accurate, you will have to take conscious and conscientious
steps to check the claims that are made to you.
IA prompt
12 Is bias inevitable in the production of knowledge?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can knowledge be divorced from the values embedded in the process of creating it?
Some people might believe that those who do not have jobs have failed to do their part in preparing themselves for
the workplace, and, therefore, they might believe that those people do not deserve any help from the government.
The political belief that the government ought not to provide extensive services to the poor in the form of assistance
for housing, food and health care, rests in the ethical belief that the poor did not do what they should have done to
take care of themselves, and are not, therefore, deserving of rewards they did not earn.
Others might believe, however, that the poor did not simply fail to take care of themselves out of a failure of
character, but that many poor people are poor because they lacked the opportunities that others had to prepare
themselves to take care of themselves and their families. The belief that government ought to provide assistance in
the form of housing, food and health care arises from the ethical belief that everyone deserves the chance to help
themselves and that where opportunity was not fair, the role of a government is to help to balance the scales.
Virtually all political beliefs can be traced back to this kind of ethical belief. Table 7.1, on the next page, provides
some examples.
Table 7.1 Justifications which can be used to support different ethical stances
Belief Ethical justification
Taxes are too high • All people ought to be able to keep what they earned
• It is wrong for government to take my money in order to help people I
don’t know
• It is wrong for government to take my money to pay for services I
cannot use
Taxes ought to be raised • We live in a community together, so we are obligated to help others in
the community, even if we have to pay for services I cannot use myself
Military spending is too low • The safety of our country and all its citizens is the most important
service a government can provide
Military spending is too high • War is essentially wrong, and governments ought not to contribute to a
culture of war-like aggression
The government should be • The role of humans in the Universe ought not to be destructive
helping to protect the
• We should be helping to preserve the Earth for future generations
environment
• We should be helping to preserve the Earth for its own sake
The government ought not to • The Earth is here for the use of human beings
spend money to preserve the
• The government ought not to be making decisions for individuals and
environment
businesses which ultimately affect the amount of income that those
people and companies can earn
IA prompt
19 What counts as a good justification for a claim?
ACTIVITY
Think of at least three political decisions that have been made in your country or in your state or local
community recently.
1 Identify the ethical values which underlie those decisions. Did you agree with those decisions? If so,
then do you share the ethical values that you just identified?
2 If you do not agree with those decisions, what are the differences in your ethical values which lead
you to hold a different political belief?
We have seen that our political judgments are based on our values, and our values are reflections of what we believe
is necessary for us to be able to maximize the quality of human life. Political judgments, in other words, are
essentially ethical judgments. Politicians decide what is the right way for a society to function, and the decisions that
politicians make draw from and contribute to the legal system of that society. The problem is made more difficult by
the fact that neither ethics nor politics has a clear external basis against which we can make those judgments.
In many of the contexts in which we try to make knowledge, we have a solid basis for determining whether
something is true or not. In the natural sciences, for example, we have nature itself: we are trying to describe nature
as it is, independent of us. In history, we are trying to ascertain what actually happened in the past. In mathematics,
we are trying to figure out implications of existing mathematics based on the inevitable character of numbers and
other mathematical concepts and their relationships to each other. When it comes to ethical judgments, however, it is
difficult to pinpoint the thing in which ethics are grounded – the thing that we can point to as the basis for all of our
claims about what is right and what is wrong. That is why, historically, we have developed proposals for ethical
systems, such as consequentialism, deontology and virtue ethics. You can read more about these three ethical
theories by using the QR code to access an ‘Introduction to Ethical Theory’.
Even so, questions of what constitutes good and evil have to be negotiated among us. Some principles are widely
agreed upon while others are subject to widespread disagreement. Since our political judgments are ethical
judgments, then, we find ourselves in the same position: we are creating and negotiating the rules as we go along.
What is politically correct, or good, is a matter of what we can agree upon. The methods section earlier detailed the
means by which we try to come to those agreements. Essential to those methods is the use of reasoned justifications,
based in evidence, in order to convince others to see things our way. In Theory of Knowledge, then, as you examine
claims made about politics, you will be looking for patterns of consistency or contradiction in the ethical principles
which underlie those political beliefs on the part of any one individual or group.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
When exposed to numerous competing ideologies and explanations, what makes an individual settle on
a particular framework?
Is there ever a neutral position from which to write about politics or from which to judge political
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
opinions?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Are political judgments a type of moral judgment?
The ‘Introduction to Ethical Theory’ looks at systems of ethical principles based on consequentialism, deontology
and virtue ethics. When trying to consider whether political beliefs are good ones or not, we can consider whether
they are soundly based on the consistent application of one of these ethical principles. Let’s consider belief 1 – that
government should ban most or all abortions. Table 7.2 shows possible arguments for each position based on those
three ethical principles.
We can see from Table 7.2 that a person with this political belief could justify that belief based on any of the three
types of ethical principles. Now we will examine political belief 2 and see if the same principles apply.
We can see that political belief 2 can also be justified using any of the three types of ethical principles. However, the
ethical principles for this second set of justifications is fundamentally different from the ethical principles offered in
the first set of justifications in Table 7.2. The first set is based on an underlying principle that we ought to look out
for others. All three of the principles are based in an attitude that it is good to help others. The second set (Table
7.3), however, is based on a completely opposite value, the belief that one should look after oneself first. There is no
valuing in this second set of principles for helping others.
When we think of virtue ethics, the character traits that we generally consider to be virtuous are things such as
charity, mercy, kindness, supportiveness, unselfishness, courageousness and trustworthiness, among others. Those
virtues all require an underlying belief that good people help others, so the reasons given in Table 7.3 would seem to
be essentially unvirtuous. We have tried to make the case that it is a virtue not to take away someone else’s money,
but when we’re talking about members of a society paying taxes in order to help sustain the society for everyone, we
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
are not talking about theft. It might be easier to argue that a good person is willing to contribute to the society in
which they live, rather than to argue that a good person should not have to contribute to that society.
Even if we do accept that the idea that a good person doesn’t take money away from someone who earned it, even
for the purposes of maintaining a community, is a virtue, we are left with the problem that the two arguments above
are not consistent. If the same person holds both political beliefs, they cannot justify them using a coherent system
of ethical principles.
One difficulty, therefore, for individuals trying to form strong political beliefs, is the difficulty of being consistent.
Another difficulty related to the ethical aspect of political beliefs applies to groups of people who hold differing
political beliefs. This is because different people justify their positions based on different, and potentially
irreconcilable, ethical principles. The fact that our political beliefs are tied to our ethical principles is one reason that
politics can be quite contentious. We naturally have a very strong emotional attachment to our ethical beliefs. We do
not easily abandon our beliefs about what is morally right and what is morally wrong.
IA prompt
7 What are the implications of having, or not having, knowledge?
ACTIVITY
Choose a controversial issue, such as global warming. Do some research about what politicians in your
community are saying about this issue. This is the knowledge that they are intending to disseminate to
their constituents.
1 Do you think that politicians in your region are, in general, providing accurate information about this
issue? How can you know?
2 Do you think politicians themselves have accurate knowledge? How can you know?
3 What kinds of forces work on politicians to cause them to provide misleading information to the public
on this, or other political issues?
4 What can you, as an individual living in your society, do to ensure that your knowledge both of the
issue and of what the politicians are doing about the issue is accurate?
Over the course of this chapter, we have seen how fundamental politics are to the smooth running of any society.
We have also seen how important our politics are to us, being, as they are, based in our ethical principles. We have
also seen how difficult it is to develop an accurate understanding of politics and political issues. Finally, we saw in
the last section how difficult it is for us to change our beliefs and how easy it is to believe the first thing we hear and
then to hang on to that belief.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Responsibility
The decisions that politicians make affect people’s lives – our own and others’ – in very deep and
significant ways. If we live in a society in which the participation of the populace contributes to the
decision-making process (if only by the selection of representatives who will make the decisions), each
one of us has a responsibility to do everything we can to make sure that our political knowledge is as
accurate as we can make it. We also have a responsibility to keep an open mind and to be willing to
change our opinions when the facts reveal that our opinions and beliefs are not well-founded. The
responsibility arises from the fact that political knowledge has such wide-ranging and long-lasting effects
on people’s lives. The consequences are, well, extremely consequential, and any failure to take
seriously the knowledge that determines the decisions which get made may result in people suffering.
Learner profile
Thinkers
How do we use critical and creative thinking to solve mathematical problems and apply mathematical
knowledge in the real world?
The activity above presents a rather strange mathematical problem. There are some very familiar elements of
mathematics – the addition signs, equal signs and some numbers, for example, but there are also cats and fish and
mice – not things we normally associate with mathematics problems. Still, you can probably solve this problem.
Take a moment to do so, if you haven’t already, before you read on to the next paragraph.
What answer did you get? Some possible answers are 10, 0 and –30. Some people might come up with other
responses, depending upon how they approached the problem. In mathematics, however, there can be only one
answer to a problem – or, at least, there must be one clearly defined set of answers to a problem (the square root of
4, for example, is either 2 or –2 because of the properties of multiplication). If we are to have more than one correct
answer, it must be because of the properties of numbers, not because different procedures generate different
answers.
Check your answer again, and, when you are confident that you have the correct response, rewrite the problem and
the steps you used to solve it using regular mathematical language.
There is, in fact, one correct answer to this problem: 0. If you got a different answer, it may be because you
neglected to notice that in the final statement there is only one fish and one mouse, whereas in the earlier statements,
mice and fish were always presented in pairs. Each mouse, therefore, is worth 2, not 4, and each fish is worth 5, not
10. The other easily made mistake is to overlook the required order of operations: you must multiply first, before
you add. The final statement can be correctly rewritten as:
Possibly you have seen problems similar to this one circulating on the internet in recent years. They are very
popular, perhaps because this relatively simple problem reveals at least two significant features of mathematics.
First, the problem reveals the inherently symbolic nature of mathematics as an endeavour. We have seen problems
laid out in numbers, and often with some letters as well, as in an algebraic expression such as:
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Should mathematics be defined as a language?
We don’t, however, really expect to encounter maths problems with pictures of animals (or anything else) in them.
Nevertheless, you had no difficulty converting those animals in your mind into numbers. Mathematics is – or has – a
language, and, as we saw in Chapter 4, one feature of language is that it is symbolic. ‘10’ is a symbol which results
from the combining of the symbols ‘1’ and ‘0’, and which stands for a very particular quantity, but so, in this case, is
a cat a symbol. The problem isn’t about cats, it’s about quantities which can be manipulated in mathematical
statements. ‘10’ doesn’t have any presence in the real world; we have just learned how to read it. Once we
understand the basic principle of addition, we have no trouble adding tens, and to swap in the cat for ‘10’ is so
simple as to be automatic. We see that there are three identical things that add up to 30, and the only possible
meaning for each of those three things then, is 10. Cats, mice and fish are not part of the normal language of
mathematics, but it’s quite simple to replace numbers with pictures – much easier than swapping, say, Swahili words
for English words, unless we are speakers of Swahili. We can easily read:
ten plus ten plus ten equals thirty
but we cannot so easily read:
kumi pamoja na kumi pamoja na kumi sawa na thelathini.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do any other areas of knowledge have a language or function as a language in the way that
mathematics does?
This problem with cats and fish raises another quite interesting question about the nature of mathematics: why must
we multiply first in the last statement? What’s wrong with reading the statement left to right, as, in English, we read
all other language-based texts? The answer to that question, of course, is that in mathematics, there is a rule which
stipulates the order in which operations must be done in order to correctly solve a maths problem – regardless of
where the operations appear in a mathematical statement. You probably learned to remember this rule using a
mnemonic. You may have learned PEMDAS, BEMDAS or BODMAS, or maybe you learned the sentence ‘Please
excuse my dear aunt Sally’, which works as a mnemonic because the first letter of each word spells out PEMDAS.
The existence of this rule is quite revealing in terms of the nature of mathematics as an area of knowledge as
opposed to other areas of knowledge. There is no reason for this order. It is arbitrary. The order does not represent
any feature or process which occurs in the physical world; we have no external standard – no real standard – to tell
us why we should work out anything in parentheses before we work out exponents, why we should work out
exponents before multiplying or dividing, or why we should multiply and divide before adding and subtracting.
PEMDAS (or BEMDAS) is a convention. The order of operations is the result of agreements that have arisen
among mathematicians about how the notation of mathematical statements ought to work. The order of operations,
in other words, is an invention, not the result of a discovery. We will explore the question of the order of operations
later in the chapter when we consider the role of ethics in mathematics. For now, it is important for you to recognize
that an important feature of mathematics is that much (or possibly all!) of it is invented, rather than discovered. In
this way, mathematics is more like the arts than it is like natural science.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Evidence
These very early mathematical objects serve as evidence for the existence of mathematics as a human
endeavour much earlier than the work of the mathematicians in ancient Greece. Historians and
mathematicians have no way of knowing with a high degree of certainty what these objects were used
for. They base their suggestions on the grouping of the notches into regular units and on the role of
similar objects in other, later societies. Note that the evidence alone is not sufficient for knowledge; the
evidence has been interpreted, and hypotheses have been developed and explained on the basis of the
evidence. In Chapter 2, you learned about the coherence theory of truth (see page 45); the interpretation
of these tally sticks as mathematical objects coheres with other known facts about mathematical objects
from other places and times.
We can imagine how the development of basic mathematics evolved from the original starting place of tally sticks.
It is pretty easy to count a small number of things by using notches in bones or sticks, but as the number gets higher,
the job gets more difficult. So long as each notch stands for one object being counted, we can only usefully use a
tally stick for small numbers of things – days in a month, or bushels of corn, perhaps. But if what we need to get is a
very large quantity, we need a system which does not rely on a one-to-one correspondence between object and tally.
We can see how a sign might have developed to indicate ten or a hundred. Still, very large numbers cannot easily be
indicated with notches – what would 1 million look like, for example? Over time, a variety of systems arose for
indicating quantity, including Roman numerals, Egyptian hieroglyphics and the abacus, among others.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
How significant have notable individuals been in shaping the nature and development of mathematics as
an area of knowledge?
Is mathematical knowledge embedded in particular cultures or traditions?
The system that we are used to today arose in India in the sixth century (‘Indian Numerals’), and consists of only ten
numbers: 0, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9. This system is capable of generating an infinite number of quantities, with the
vast majority consisting of a very manageable number of digits. The development of zero came later than the
development of the other symbols, and the system evolved over several hundred years as it was disseminated
throughout the Arab world and, eventually, to Europe. If you are interested in a more detailed explanation of how
the Hindu-Arabic system which we use today arose, use the QR code here on the right to watch a video lecture on
the history of the system.
The Roman numerals system seems like a pretty simple number system using a relatively small number of symbols.
In fact, there are even fewer symbols in Roman numerals than there are in the Hindu-Arabic system:
ACTIVITY
1 Try writing out this number in Roman numerals: 3682. Give it a try before you read on. How did you
do? If you broke the number down into its parts, you might have come up with something like this:
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
The language used to express mathematical concepts can be seen to constrain the pursuit of
knowledge. Are there similar constraints in other areas of knowledge?
Learner profile
Inquirers
How does the study of pure mathematics rely on the skill of inquiry?
All of mathematics, since that humble beginning, has been derived in the same way. Once we know about prime
numbers, we can start asking ourselves what the implications of prime numbers are – how many are there? Are there
an infinite number of prime numbers? We can start developing ideas about what happens when we multiply numbers
by themselves, and we have squares and square roots to learn more about. And so on. The mathematics that
professional mathematicians work on today is a lot more complicated than ideas about the existence of even and odd
numbers, but the process in which they engage is the same: pure mathematics is the study of the mathematics which
inevitably arises from existing mathematics. We will investigate this process in more detail in the section on
Methods and tools, but for now, we can see that when we try to define what mathematics is, there are two critical
features:
• it is a language for expressing knowledge about space, quantity and motion
• it is the ongoing development of new mathematical principles based in the mathematical knowledge that we
already have.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Part of the scope of mathematics is mathematics itself. Are there any other AOKs with a goal of studying
existing knowledge in that AOK?
So, when we think about the scope of mathematics, one big part of that is mathematics itself. New mathematics is
developed out of any and all existing mathematics.
Another big part of the scope of mathematics, however, can be defined by the aspects of the world and our lives to
which it can be applied. The scope of applied mathematics is huge – maybe encompassing all of human experience.
Most people use mathematics quite frequently in their everyday lives, for working out a budget, or figuring out how
long it will take to get from home to a friend’s house 100 miles away. A lot of this kind of everyday mathematics is
done for us, of course, by the technological gadgets that we have: financial records software and GPS, for instance.
Some people use basic mathematics more frequently.
ACTIVITY
Consider an alpaca farmer who owns, say, 25 acres of land and 40 alpaca. She wants to breed and
raise her alpaca and sell some of them, while shearing others for the wool, which can be sold, or made
into knitted goods which can be sold. Here are some of the activities for which she might use
mathematics on a regular basis:
• Calculating the quantity of food she needs to feed her alpaca through the winter.
• Calculating the amount of pasture she needs vs the amount of land she needs for growing food to
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Why is mathematics so important in other AOKs, particularly the natural sciences?
Does mathematics only yield knowledge about the real world when it is combined with other AOKs?
Mathematics is used for a wide variety of other purposes beyond what the average person would use it for. It can be
used, for example, to determine the identity of the creator of a work of art. In 2013, Patrick Juola, a professor of
computer science at Duquesne University in Pittsburgh, used a computer program that he developed to create an
extensive and detailed statistical analysis of a crime novel called The Cuckoo’s Calling, by Robert Galbraith. The
program was able to determine that it had, as a tip given to a London newspaper had suggested, actually been
written by JK Rowling, the famed author of the Harry Potter novels (Juola). If you want to read in detail about how
the statistical analysis was done, use the QR code on the right.
Mathematics can also be used in order to determine whether a painting is the creation of a famous painter, or
whether it is a forgery. A Princeton mathematician, Ingrid Daubechies, developed a software program using a
mathematical function called wavelet analysis, in order to analyse the brushstrokes in paintings. The mathematical
function breaks the image down into many layers of features. By analysing those layers in digital images of a large
number of paintings by Van Gogh, the algorithm was able to establish a sort of digital fingerprint of Van Gogh’s
brushwork (Greenwood). When challenged by the Public Broadcasting System (NOVA) to see if they could use the
mathematical tool to correctly identify a copy among six Van Gogh paintings, three different teams were all able to
do so. The fake turned out to have many more wavelets than the real Van Gogh work. The team think that the
explanation for this is that the copier had to work more slowly in order to try to copy precisely, and that more
hesitant work results in more wavelets, which cannot be seen by the naked eye, but which can be detected through a
mathematical analysis of the digital image (Greenwood).
The use of mathematics to analyse identify the creator of artworks might be a surprising one, but mathematics is, of
course, used for many much more familiar purposes. Engineers use mathematics in building bridges, architects use
mathematics in designing buildings. Mathematical models are used as a means of determining the effectiveness of
projects. In Chapter 3, you read about the problem of building the ability to solve ethical dilemmas into a self-
driving car, but we can also consider that the design of the self-driving car is an example of a project which is based
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does mathematical knowledge have more power in the world than other AOKs? Is the power of
mathematical knowledge different from the power of other kinds of knowledge?
DEEPER THINKING
Driverless cars
The mathematical modelling related to autonomous cars all suggests that self-driving cars are
dramatically safer than human-driven cars. Self-driving cars can ‘see’ in 360°, they never get distracted
by passengers or cell phones, and they never get sleepy or otherwise stop paying careful attention to
what goes on around them. Yet surveys about self-driving cars given to the consumers who would have
to buy into the concept suggest that people aren’t convinced. A March 2019 survey in the United States
showed that 71 per cent of consumers who responded to the survey fear self-driving cars (Naughton).
Another, more global, survey in May of 2019 revealed that about a quarter of drivers would be willing to
ride in a self-driving car a year from now, but that that number increased to 67 per cent when the
consumers were asked how they would feel 10 years from now (Martin). The highest rate of acceptance
came among Chinese respondents, with the highest anxiety reported by consumers in the UK and the
US (Martin). If you would like to read about the survey in more detail, use the QR code here.
What do you think accounts for the fact that people’s attitudes toward this technology are so dramatically
out of line with the mathematical facts? Do you think that if people were given the mathematical facts
they would change their minds? Why or why not? How reliable do you think a person’s claim about how
they will feel in 10 years’ time is? Why?
EE links
An exploration into the kind of mathematics needed in order to design a safe autonomous car, as well as
to model the functionality of that car, could make for an interesting extended essay project. What role
Scientists rely heavily on mathematics, and this has made many technological developments possible. Houses, cell
phones, dams, airplanes and computers, for example, all need extensive mathematics in their creation.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do other areas of knowledge, such as the natural sciences, have the ability to change people’s values
and beliefs differently or better than mathematics?
CASE STUDY
Katherine Johnson
The 2016 book by Margot Lee Shetterly, called Hidden Figures explores the role of women
mathematicians working for NASA in the early days of the race to the Moon in the wake of Russia’s
launch of Sputnik. The movie of the same name was pretty heavily fictionalized, but it did correctly
convey the fact that Katherine Johnson worked on the calculations which allowed the module to orbit the
Earth and to re-enter safely.
Her work, done by hand, was more accurate than the work done by early computers which were too new
to be reliable, and sometimes gave out contradictory answers. The re-entry calculations in particular
were critical because if the capsule were to come in too steeply it could break up or burn up. If it were to
come in at too shallow an angle, there might be insufficient braking and the ship could continue its orbit,
heading back out of the atmosphere and then re-entering at some later point, well out of range of where
it was supposed to be (Scuka).
Johnson is most famous for her work making the calculations for John Glenn’s Freedom 7 mission. He
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
did not trust the computers and he asked for Johnson specifically, saying that he would trust the
numbers she came up with (Shetterly).
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Power
The space race in the 1960s provides a good example of one of the ways in which power influences
knowledge. The space race began when the Soviet Union launched Sputnik, the world’s first satellite, in
1957. At that point, the United States stepped up an effort to get ahead in what had suddenly become a
space race (Garber 2007). But after Soviet astronaut Yuri Gagarin became the first man in space on 12
April 1961, the pressure to catch up and pass the Soviets intensified. The US sent Alan Shepard into
space three weeks later, but Shepard flew a short suborbital flight, where Gagarin had orbited the Earth.
On 25 May, 20 days after Shepard’s flight, President John F Kennedy made a speech before congress
announcing the US goal of putting a man on the Moon before the end of the decade (Garber 2013).
The goal was achieved on 20 July 1969 when Neil Armstrong took the now-famous ‘giant leap for
mankind’. Three men went to the Moon in Apollo 11, but the scale of the programme which made that
possible was almost unimaginably large. Taking into account all of the different problems that had to be
solved – engineering, physics, maths, design of clothing, development of food, and many more – 400
000 people worked on the project (Riley). Many of these people worked on solving problems that had
never been solved before – making, in other words, brand new knowledge in many fields, but in
particular, science, mathematics and technology. The cost of the project was $28 billion, or the
equivalent of $288 billion in 2019 money (Planetary Society).
Such a massive knowledge-making endeavour could never be organized or carried out without the
power of a government behind it. No private individual or organization could fund or organize such a
project. The reason that this knowledge was developed at the time it was developed and in the relatively
short amount of time that it took, was that the power structure of the United States was brought to bear.
Possibly all the same knowledge would have been developed eventually, but without the call to action
from the US president and the financial commitment authorized by Congress, it would almost certainly
have taken much longer, and all the technology which has developed in the 50 years since then would
have been delayed as well. Some of the technologies with civilian uses that arose as part of (or in the
aftermath of) the space race are artificial limbs, the handheld vacuum, the world’s fastest swimsuit and a
water purifier, among others (Kolbe).
The space race, then, provides an excellent example of how systemic power shapes the knowledge that
is developed and which becomes, inevitably, the foundation for later knowledge development.
The scope of mathematics, then, is wide-ranging. It can be used to complete an almost unimaginable number of
tasks ranging from counting change to bringing a man safely back from outer space. Mathematics is not just useful,
then; it is, in many cases, critical to the point of being the difference between life and death.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
ACTIVITY
Can you think of any human activity or physical object in the Universe to which some mathematical
description could not be developed or applied?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Are these same mental skills which are needed for success in mathematics necessary in other areas of
knowledge? Which ones? Why?
In being able to manipulate objects (physical and then symbolic) using these concepts, children and then students
can use such characteristics as shape, size, weight, length, width and height. As understanding of how to use those
characteristics develops, students also learn about quantities such as many, few, fewer, more and none. They must
learn how to discriminate between things which are the same and things which are different, how to match and
group, and how to categorize based on multiple characteristics. All of these cognitive skills must be mastered in
order for a person to make progress in mathematics.
ACTIVITY
1 Take a regular deck of 52 playing cards and begin by organizing them in order by suit from highest to
lowest. Which of the concepts in Table 8.1 did you have to use to do that?
2 Next, put them into categories. Make sure that when you create your categories, you do not have any
cards left over. Do this in three different ways, using three different systems of categorization. Which
of the concepts in Table 8.1 did you have to use to do that?
3 Finally, hold the deck loosely and drop it onto the table from a height of a couple of feet. Identify all the
ways in which they are now physically related to each other (such as ‘next to’). Which of the concepts
in Table 8.1 did you have to use to do that?
Probably you had no difficulty doing any of these tasks. How did you learn to perceive the world in those
various ways?
4 Repeat steps 1–3 using the following collection of numbers:
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the kind of thinking required to solve the problem in the activity below compare to the kind of
thinking used to solve problems in history or the arts?
ACTIVITY
The IB guides for Mathematics, from the Primary Years Programme through the Diploma Programme, identify the
following skills (among others) as goals for students to achieve as they study mathematics throughout their school
years:
• Count, sort, match and compare objects, shapes and numbers.
• Recognize and continue patterns (and relationships) to make reasonable estimates.
• Analyse, make predictions and infer from data.
• Describe patterns as general rules consistent with findings.
• Organize information using a logical structure.
• Justify the degree of accuracy of a solution.
• Justify whether a solution makes sense in the context of the authentic real-life situation.
• Approximation.
• Generalization.
• Modelling.
Did you identify any of these skills as being needed in order to solve the problem on page 268?
We can see, as we start to consider the fundamental nature of these mathematical skills and concepts, how integrally
connected mathematics is to the nature of physical objects in the world and their relationships to each other. We can
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What is it about mathematics that enables mathematical results to remain unchanged over time?
One final point about the scope of mathematics: because advanced mathematics relies on symbols, rather than on
real objects, and because the development of new mathematics so often occurs as a result of the effort to extend
existing mathematics, mathematics is capable of dealing with things that do not exist in the real world or which
might exist, but whose existence has not yet been absolutely established. A simple example of this is negative
numbers. The number –12 does not represent a quantity which can be represented by real-world objects such as
oranges. The concept of negative numbers had appeared in China by 200BC (Rogers) but remained controversial
until the nineteenth century. The need for negative numbers was illustrated by an Alexandrian mathematician named
Diophantus, who offered this problem:
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
The scope of mathematics includes material that does not exist in the real world. How does that
compare and contrast to religious knowledge, for example?
Diophantus called that result ‘absurd’ (Rogers). Certainly it is absurd if we want to restrict ourselves to mathematics
that reflects things that can and do exist in the real world; however, if we consider that pure mathematics explores
the implications of mathematics, even this early example reveals the inevitable need for negative numbers. The
nature of mathematics certainly allows for the creation of such problems as 4x + 20 = 4, and so the ‘absurd’ answer
is an answer to a real, though abstract, problem.
ACTIVITY
In the next section, we will consider how different approaches to and beliefs about mathematics might change our
understanding of mathematics as an area of knowledge and our knowledge of the nature of mathematics itself.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the knowledge we can develop about nature from mathematics differ in significant ways from the
knowledge that we can gain about nature from the natural sciences or the arts?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Truth
Truth takes on different significance depending on what aspect of mathematics we are looking at. If we
are talking about pure mathematics, the truth that is revealed is truth about the nature of mathematics
itself. If we are talking about applied mathematics, we can gauge the truth of mathematical statements
by how functional they are. If the mathematics works, as it did in the effort to send men to the Moon,
then we can say that it is true, or at least that it successfully depicts truths in the world.
ACTIVITY
Which of the following activities are familiar to you as part of your study of mathematics in school? Which
do you not engage in?
1 Memorizing formulas.
2 Solving problems from a textbook.
3 Getting ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers.
4 Following established procedures.
5 Demonstrating that you know what the proper procedures are.
6 Applying known formulas to practice situations.
7 Creating an original proof.
8 Studying the nature of modular forms.
9 Analysing existing mathematical conjectures in an effort to see if they can be proven.
10 Submitting mathematical papers for publication in maths journals.
11 Making presentations at conferences to present new conjectures or new proofs.
12 Collaborating with mathematicians at universities or even from other countries.
Probably most students will identify the first six as being familiar activities, while the last six are not. How
might you characterize the difference between what you do as a student and the kinds of activities
described in numbers 7–12? What is the difference between the kind of mathematical knowledge you
are developing and the kind of mathematical knowledge that professional mathematicians develop?
The experience of learning mathematics is not, of course, the same for all students. Some students struggle with it
much more than others. In the Methods and tools section, we will investigate the kind of thinking skills needed to
learn mathematics, which may differ among students and professional mathematicians.
Toward the end of the previous section, we looked at some concepts developed by the Texas School for the Blind
and Visually Impaired. The school delved into those concepts in detail, because the experience of learning them is,
for blind students, quite different from the experience that sighted students have of learning those concepts and,
therefore, of learning mathematics.
CAS links
If there is a school for the visually impaired in or near to your community, you might organize a trip to
speak with the students and teachers about how they go about learning mathematics. You could also
volunteer as a tutor, which could help the younger students and expand your understanding of what is
required in order to develop strong skills in mathematics.
Feynman talked about axioms as being the starting place for making knowledge in mathematics. Axioms are
defining characteristics of mathematical systems. What that means is that once a system, such as geometry or
algebra, has been defined, there are certain characteristics of that system which define that system. You can think of
axioms, or postulates, which is another word for axioms, as being something like the rules of a game. The rules of a
game define the game and they are what make the game different from all other games.
The metaphor of the game as a system and the rules as axioms is not perfect, but it should help us now to notice a
few important things about axioms:
• The rules of a game do not need any kind of argument or proof. They are the rules that have been agreed upon by
the people in charge of governing the game. In the same way, axioms do not need any kind of argument or proof:
mathematicians simply agree to accept them as true. They are the facts of a mathematical system.
• Just as when we know the rules of a game, we know the nature of the game, what we know when we know the
axioms of a system is the nature of the system itself.
• When we change the rules of a game, we get a completely new game. The metaphor here for mathematical axioms
is not exact, because while we could just decide to change the rules of a game (and in fact, the professional
organizations governing sports do, from time to time, adjust rules), we cannot do that with mathematics. The
axioms of mathematics are not chosen by mathematicians in the same way that rules are developed for games. The
system is defined, and the axioms are the assumptions that automatically come along with that system. To change
an axiom, we would have to change the system first.
• Rules only work for one game – we can’t apply the rules of baseball to cricket and still call it baseball, as it is
known in the United States. In the same way, we can’t say that one set of axioms is ‘wrong’ because that set
doesn’t work in a different system.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
The example of games serves as a metaphor, or an analogy, for how axioms work in mathematics. What
other AOKs rely on metaphor or analogy to provide explanations?
Now we’ll move from the metaphorical comparison with games to an example from mathematics: Euclid’s
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
postulates for his geometry. First, a little review: Euclidean geometry is the geometry of the flat plane. Euclid
defined a flat plane this way:
A flat surface that is infinitely large and with zero thickness (‘Plane’).
There are only five postulates which form the entire basis for geometry. These postulates are (‘Euclid’s Postulates’):
1 A straight line segment can be drawn joining any two points.
2 Any straight line segment can be extended indefinitely in a straight line.
3 Given any straight line segment, a circle can be drawn having the segment as radius and one endpoint as centre.
4 All right angles are congruent.
5 If two lines are drawn which intersect a third in such a way that the sum of the inner angles on one side is less
than two right angles, then the two lines inevitably must intersect each other on that side if extended far enough.
This postulate is equivalent to what is known as the parallel postulate.
ACTIVITY
Given what you learned about axioms (postulates) using the games metaphor, discuss the following
questions with a classmate.
1 Why must all right angles be congruent?
2 Why is it not possible to just decide to eliminate one of these postulates? Consider, for example, the
second one. Why can we not just decide that straight lines cannot be extended indefinitely? (Keep in
mind the definition of a flat plane, which is what forms the basis for Euclidean geometry.)
3 If we consider the geometry of a sphere instead of the geometry of a flat plane, would you expect
these same postulates to apply? Why or why not?
Out of these five postulates, all the theorems of geometry have been derived. One well-known theorem about
triangles, for example, is the Triangle Sum Theorem, which you may be familiar with. The theorem states that the
interior angles of a triangle add up to 180° (Sloman). If we switch systems, however, from the Euclidean geometry,
which is the geometry of flat planes, and we move to the geometry of a sphere, the axioms change. A spherical
triangle does not have the same properties as a flat triangle, and the Triangle Sum Theorem cannot apply. In fact,
with spherical triangles, the sum of the angles varies with the size of the triangle and can be as large as 540°
(‘Spherical Triangle’).
One more important point about pure mathematics: axioms form the basis for defining any system of mathematics,
and thus they form the basis for the earliest theorems which are developed in that branch of mathematics. Once
theorems have been proven, though (and we will investigate this process further in the Methods and tools section
that follows), the theorems become available as premises to be used in developing future mathematics. In Chapter 1,
we talked about the nature of formal arguments and their reliance on premises. Axioms are the earliest premises in
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
developing the arguments in any given branch of mathematics which become theorems – established proofs – but
every theorem can also be used as premises in later proofs. The diagram on the right illustrates the process.
This diagram is intended only to demonstrate the process, showing how at each level, the new knowledge becomes
the basis for the next stage of developing knowledge. It is not intended to illustrate the only possible ways that
knowledge grows in mathematics. For one thing, it would not be likely that there would always be three axioms or
theorems forming the premises of the argument. For another, axioms and theorems could be mixed at any level. In
fact, any effort to develop a new mathematical proof is likely to involve many more premises than are shown here.
Andrew Wiles’ proof of Fermat’s Last Theorem, about which you read in Chapter 4, is 200 pages long (‘The
Proof’). Clearly, many different mathematical claims formed the basis for such an argument. One important thing to
notice in this diagram, however, is that each level is built on the one before it, simply on the basis of logic, rather
than on the basis of any kind of reflection of the physical world. The arrows represent the logic which connects the
statements at any given level. So long as the logic is valid, and if all the statements in the first column are true, then
the statements in the second column are true. So long as the next level of logic is valid, and if the statements in the
second column are true, then the statement in the third column is true.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can natural or human scientists ever use this kind of deductive reasoning in supporting their knowledge
claims?
DEEPER THINKING
Euclidean geometry and real space
We have already acknowledged that axioms are assumptions which have been excused from any need
for proof. They form the starting point for a long string of logical deductions which become new
mathematics, which in turn forms the basis for the invention of still more mathematics. We can go one
step further in considering what we know as a result of this process of logical deduction. Feynman made
the claim, possibly somewhat shockingly, that mathematicians do not care – or need to know – whether
the mathematical facts that they are working from are true or in any way related to reality. We looked,
however, at Euclid’s axioms for geometry, and we are quite accustomed to thinking that geometric
figures are real-world objects. If we build a house, for example, the walls are rectangular or square, and
so we can use the geometry that we know to help us design the house.
If we think more deeply, however, we will realize that Euclid’s geometry is the geometry of the flat plane.
Remembering that the definition of a flat plane is:
a flat surface that is infinitely large and with zero thickness
we can immediately see that no such thing exists. We have flat surfaces, but a flat surface that is
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
infinitely large would spread in all directions indefinitely without end, and that is clearly impossible.
Nothing in the Universe, furthermore, has zero thickness. Something with zero thickness cannot exist as
a physical object.
Other geometric figures pose us the same problems. Consider the rectangle, which, as we just noted, is
a familiar shape which is integral to the building of houses. The actual definition of a rectangle is:
a 4-sided polygon where all interior angles are 90° (‘Rectangle’).
We have to realize, however, that a rectangle is part of plane geometry, which means that rectangles are
figures which exist as part of the plane – the infinite flat surface with no thickness. The rectangle is not
infinite, but it does still have zero thickness. Such a rectangle, because it is imaginary and is not subject
to the consequences of physical existence, can be understood to be absolutely perfect. That is: it has no
flaws of any kind. If we consider that an absolutely perfect rectangle has four 90° angles, those angles
are exactly 90° – not even the tiniest smidgen more or the tiniest smidgen less. In the real world, we
cannot create rectangles with that degree of perfection. If we draw one with chalk on a board, it might
look perfect to the naked eye, but if we examined the chalk lines closely with a magnifying glass, we
would see that the lines have rough edges or that they are slightly wider in some places than others. The
angles would be just slightly more or less than 90°. We have tools that help us to get closer and close,
and with computers, we can get pretty close, but if we print it out on paper, flaws in the paper or slight
inconsistencies in the surface of the paper will mean that anything with visible lines is not the same thing
as the imaginary rectangle of Euclid’s system. A rectangle on a computer screen has physical lines
which we can see, but which do not exist in any kind of visible form in the ideal rectangle that Euclid
described. And, perhaps most importantly, if we make a rectangle out of drywall as part of our process of
constructing a house, our rectangle’s sides will only be as straight as it is possible for our saws to cut,
and the corners will only be as close to 90° as it is possible for our tools to make them.
Euclid’s axioms, and all the theorems, such as the Triangle Sum Theorem, apply to the imaginary flat
plane which Euclid defined. They do not apply precisely and exactly to anything that actually exists in the
real world. So when we think about the question of what we know when we know the axioms and
theorems of Euclid’s geometry, what we know precisely and with absolute certainty (see page 3 in
Chapter 1), is the nature of the flat plane and the other geometrical figures, all of which are imaginary.
Fortunately for us, that level of precision is not necessary for us to be able to use the principles of plane
geometry in the real world. What we know about the real world when we know the axioms and theorems
of geometry is good enough for us to be able to manipulate real-world versions of geometric figures well
enough for them to serve our purposes. Our wall is not going to fall down because of tiny errors in
measurement, so long as, when we create our real-world rectangle, the corners are as close to 90° as
we can make them.
In the discussion of absolute certainty in Chapter 1, we talked about the fact that most of our knowledge
does not have to be absolutely certain to be functional. The creation of geometric figures in the real
world and the use of geometric theorems to govern the design of those physical objects is a good
example of knowledge which is accurate enough for us to use with confidence.
ACTIVITY
Discuss the following questions with your classmates.
1 What is the difference between certainty and absolute certainty?
2 Does that difference have a functional meaning in pure mathematics?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can homeowners and business owners apply the knowledge made from other areas of knowledge such
as history or the human sciences in the way that they can apply the knowledge from mathematics?
CASE STUDY
Alan Turing and the Enigma machine
One such mathematician was Britain’s Alan Turing, who famously helped to break the German Enigma
cipher during the Second World War.
Some background information: although often used interchangeably, the terms ‘code’ and ‘cipher’ are
not precisely the same. In a code, the words of the intended message are replaced by other words. In a
cipher, the letters of the original message are changed or rearranged (‘The Enigma of Alan Turing’).
Alan Turing was a cryptanalyst. When he was working on breaking Enigma, he was actually trying to
break a very complicated cipher, which had in turn been created out of messages which had already
been translated using a code. The reason a mathematician was needed was because of the enormously
high number of possibilities that the machine could generate. The machine had three wheels inside of it,
and each wheel had all 26 letters. The person encrypting the message would type in a letter, which
would be cycled through each of the three wheels in one direction and then back through each of the
wheels again. You can use the QR code to read a more detailed explanation and see a diagram of how
the complexities of the machine worked.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
The Enigma system was so complex that there were 17 000 possible combinations that could be used to
assign a coded letter before one had to repeat (Hern). No human could ever figure out how to decode
even one letter; a mathematical algorithm was required to figure it out. Turing actually invented and built
a computing machine that had the capacity to run the possibilities and break the cipher. It took Turing
and a team of mathematicians more than five months to break the code (IWM Staff). As the war went on,
Turing developed the mathematics needed to break the Enigma naval code, which was more
complicated than the original Enigma code.
Although Turing set out to figure out the mathematics that would help solve the very important problem
of the Enigma cipher, the knowledge that he developed also turned out to have wide-ranging application
in the world. The work that Turing did during the war became the foundation for the modern computing
age, including the development of computing machines, chips and processors (IWM Staff). A major
award – the equivalent to a Nobel Prize in computer science – is named after Alan Turing.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Values
Clearly the work that Alan Turing and the other cryptanalysts did during the Second World War was
incredibly valuable to the world. It is credited with saving thousands of lives and with shortening the war
by several years. We also saw that the work done then brought us into the computing age, and the value
to the world of computer technology is incalculable.
An important point to notice about mathematics, however, is that although applied mathematics is of
great importance to our lives in the twenty-first century, pure mathematics is valued deeply as well. In
Chapter 4, we heard about Andrew Wiles and his solution to the 300-year-old problem of Fermat’s Last
Theorem. In 2016, Wiles was awarded the Abel Prize, the mathematical equivalent of a Nobel Prize, for
his solution. His prize is equivalent to the prize named after Turing, and so we can understand that to
mathematicians, outstanding work is valued, both when it has great utility in the world and when it does
not.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Are other areas of knowledge equally useful to mathematics?
Are the reasons we have for seeking knowledge in mathematics different from our reasons for seeking
knowledge in the other AOKs?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is the knowledge generated in the different disciplines of the natural and human sciences related in the
same way that the knowledge in the different disciplines of mathematics is related?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Consider the other AOKs: Is the question of their invention or discovery problematic in the same way
that it is problematic in mathematics?
Many mathematicians hold this view, but it is a contentious one. Many other mathematicians hold the exact opposite
view: that mathematics is a human invention which has been developed as a means of describing or modelling
reality – it is a useful tool, which we use for solving problems and which we expand by pursuing the logical
development of ideas (Knapp).
An interesting thing about this difference in perspective is that they cannot both be right. One view describes the
situation as it really is, and the other view does not. We have no way, at least not at this point in time, to establish
which belief is true. What is important about this difference in perspective is that our understanding of what we
know is completely different depending on which perspective is correct. If Platonism is correct, then part of what we
know when we know mathematics is the immaterial world, a reality outside of ourselves. If the anti-Platonist view is
correct, however, then our knowledge of mathematics does not reveal anything to us about a reality outside of
ourselves that would continue to exist if all humanity suddenly blinked out of existence. Instead, we know
something about the way human minds work, and our capacity for developing abstract concepts that we can use for
our purposes.
We have now considered three different ways to consider different perspectives in mathematics:
• the different perspectives of the people who study maths, defined by their purposes
• the different perspectives of the content of mathematics, defined by the focus of the different branches of maths
• the different perspectives of the relationship of mathematics to reality.
Considering these perspectives can help us understand the complexity of mathematics and the diversity of the ways
in which our mathematical knowledge develops.
In the next section, we will consider in more detail the methods and tools of knowledge-making in mathematics.
ACTIVITY
1 Which of these two views of the origin of mathematics makes the most sense to you: Platonism or the
idea that mathematics is an invented system for describing things that happen and things that exist in
the physical world? Why?
2 What arguments would you use to try to convince someone who holds the opposite view that your
view makes the most sense?
3 Discuss and debate these different perspectives with your classmates.
Proof
The formal name for that method of making new knowledge in mathematics out of a series of logical deductions is
rigorous proof. Mathematicians begin with a conjecture, which is like an hypothesis in the natural sciences: a
conjecture is an idea that one or more mathematicians think is true, but which has not yet been through the process
of proof. In order to convert that conjecture into a theorem, the mathematicians must subject it to the process of the
rigorous proof. ‘Rigorous’ means that all the possibilities that the proof could be wrong have been excluded, and the
proof is absolutely certain.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What is meant by the term ‘proof’ in mathematics, and how is this similar to, or different from, what is
meant by this term in other areas of knowledge?
CASE STUDY
The Pythagorean Theorem
Pythagoras, for example, had to demonstrate that his conjecture was true for every single possible right
triangle. Once he could do that, then the conjecture was proven and became the Pythagorean Theorem.
The proof itself can be seen as a tool for conveying the logic which ensures the absolute certainty of the
proof.
Here is a proof that we can use to demonstrate the absolute certainty that a2 + b2 = c2:
We begin with a right triangle with sides of unknown lengths, so we label them a, b and c.
The term a2 can be physically represented with a square whose sides are all length a, so now we draw
the squares with the sides a, b and c.
We can also see, now, that, because the two squares have sides a and b, there is a rectangle just
waiting to be formed under the a square which is going to have sides a and b, and will, therefore, be
made up of two more triangles with sides a, b and c, just like the ones we just made.
Those resulting four triangles with hypotenuse c certainly look as if they are congruent to the original a,
b, c triangle, but how can we know that they are?
Before you read on, take some time to discuss this problem with your classmates and see if you can
come up with an idea of what to do next.
We know one more thing: the triangles are all right triangles. There is no way to create a right triangle
with hypotenuse c, where c is exactly congruent to the hypotenuse of our original triangle, without also
having sides a and b which are congruent to sides a and b in our original triangle. Therefore: we have
four new triangles with sides a, b, and c.
DEEPER THINKING
Reason and imagination
Pythagoras developed his proof using deductive reasoning and a good dose of creative thinking. The
thinking that you must do when you work on mathematical problems is very similar, even when you are
not creating original proofs.
Let’s think back to the problem involving cats and mice and fish, which you solved at the beginning of the
chapter. What methods or tools did you have to use in order to solve that problem? Certainly you had to
see in order to read the problem, and you had to use your memory in order to know what cats and fish
and mice are, as well as in order to recognize the significance of the mathematical symbols + , – and = ,
and that memory is, of course, related to your knowledge of language. You had to use reasoning to work
out various steps such as ‘if there are three cats and they add up to 30, then one cat must be worth 10’.
If you had never seen a mathematical problem with cats and mice and fish before, you also engaged in
an imaginative act: the ability to imagine that cats and other animals could be symbols for numbers.
All of these processes occurred simultaneously, not one after the other, and you most likely didn’t even
notice them happening: they were automatic. Probably even the logical deduction that if three cats are
30 then one cat is 10 happened so automatically you did not have to think about it. You looked at the
problem and right away knew that one cat = 10.
Discuss the following questions with your classmates.
1 Why were you able to do that much thinking, using sense perception, language, reasoning, memory
and imagination, so smoothly and rapidly?
2 We call the kind of instantaneous processing described above, which results in your immediately
knowing something (in this case, part of the answer you need in order to solve the larger problem)
intuition. What does this example reveal about the nature of intuition?
I just had to find something completely new; it’s a mystery where that comes from.
Andrew Wiles
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the use of imagination in mathematics differ significantly from the use of imagination in the arts?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do mathematicians reconcile the fact that some conclusions seem to conflict with our intuitions?
Learner profile
Balanced
How does the development of knowledge in mathematics rely on a balance of our various cognitive
skills, such as reason, imagination and intuition?
ACTIVITY
Do you think there is a difference between the way that students must use their imaginations in learning
mathematics at school and the way that professional mathematicians such as Andrew Wiles must use
theirs? If so, why? If not, why not?
CASE STUDY
Richard Arenstorf
Richard Arenstorf was working at the Army Ballistics Missile Agency with Werner von Braun when the
goal of landing a man on the Moon by the end of the 1960s was announced. Among the many problems
that had to be solved was a problem that no mathematician had been able to solve for 300 years: the
three-body problem. The problem for NASA was that celestial bodies in space exert gravitational forces
on each other. The solution to the two-body problem had been fairly easily solved, so NASA knew, for
example, how the Earth and the Moon were each affected by the gravitational force from the other.
Sending a spaceship to the Moon would necessarily introduce a third body into the system, and NASA
needed to know how the gravity from the Earth and the Moon would affect the ship’s trajectory. The ship,
too, would exert a gravitational pull on both the Earth and the Moon, though obviously that pull would be
much weaker than the gravity created by either the Earth or the Moon. It had to be taken into account,
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
nevertheless.
The trajectory of the spaceship would be the path that the ship would follow. It could not just fly in a
straight line from the Earth to the Moon the way you might be able to drive in a straight line from one end
of your street to the other. Each end of your street remains in the same position relative to the other,
regardless of how the Earth turns and travels around the Sun. But the Earth and the Moon do not stay in
the same position relative to each other; both bodies are turning and the Moon revolves around the
Earth while both Earth and Moon travel around the Sun. A spaceship shot in a straight line from Cape
Canaveral in Florida would head out into outer space and miss the Moon by a long way. The trajectory
had to be curved. The exact amount of curve had to be controlled, or Apollo 11 could end up flying off
into outer space.
Think about moving objects in relationship to each other: if you want to throw a ball at a moving car and
hit it, you have to time your throw so that you release the ball before the car is lined up with you. If you
throw when the car is in front of you, it will be past you and gone before the ball can reach it. The further
away you are from the car, the greater the distance behind the car will be when the ball passes the line
where the car once was. The Moon is 238 000 miles away, so if we don’t ‘throw’ the spaceship at it at
just the right moment, taking into account how the gravity will affect the speed and direction of the ship,
we could miss the Moon by a truly enormous distance. The maths had to be right. (We do not, by the
way, suggest that you should go out and throw balls at moving cars!)
The illustration on the next page shows the two different trajectories that Apollo 11 had to take. The
bottom line shows the path it would take on the way to the Moon, and the top line shows the path it
would take on the way back from the Moon.
In order to work out precisely how to make Apollo 11 go where they needed it to go, NASA needed to
know exactly how all the gravitational forces would work on the ship.
Arenstorf knew precisely what the problem was when he set out to solve it. He was able to solve the
problem for the exact case at hand: the case in which the three bodies were the Earth, the Moon and the
Apollo spacecraft. The problem has not been solved for all cases. Arenstorf did not provide a rigorous
proof for this problem; however, he did have to create a justification good enough to convince the rest of
the NASA scientists, engineers and mathematicians that it would work. In the end, the fact that his
solution was correct was demonstrated because it worked. The trajectory that was planned based on
Arenstorf’s solution did, in actual practice, get Apollo 11 to the Moon and back.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Explanation
A proof is one kind of explanation used in mathematics – it is the mechanism for explaining how
mathematicians know that a particular claim is absolutely certain. The proof doesn’t necessarily work in
a situation such as Richard Arenstorf’s: he could not develop a rigorous proof, because he solved the
We have looked primarily at cases of applied mathematics in which the problem is known before the mathematics
exists to solve it. There are, however, cases in which pure mathematicians create mathematics which can be used
later in order to solve real-world problems, although that was not the intention when it was developed. Here are two
examples (Rowlett 166–69):
• Irish mathematician William Rowland Hamilton came up with the mathematics for something called quaternions
in 1843. Quaternions are representations of what happens if the complex number system is extended into the
fourth dimension – a dimension which we, of course, as three-dimensional beings, cannot experience. Nothing
much happened with the idea of quaternions for more than 150 years, until they turned out to have an application
in robotics and gaming. The mathematics that no one was very interested in turned out to be extremely useful in
an industry worth more than $100 billion.
• Mathematics about probability theory began to be developed in the seventeenth century by a mathematician who
was also a compulsive gambler, Girolamo Cardano. Cardano thought he had calculated the odds of being able to
throw a double six with two dice at least once in 24 throws, but it didn’t work. He called in Blaise Pascal and
Pierre de Fermat in 1654, and together they laid the foundations for modern probability theory. One very practical,
but unanticipated, application of this mathematics is for use in the insurance industry. Insurers used to think that
they should sell few policies because each one was of high risk, but probability theory demonstrates that the
opposite is true: it’s better to sell many policies because, as shown by the law of large numbers, the bigger the
number, the better the prediction.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can you think of examples from other areas of knowledge in which knowledge that was developed for
one purpose was then discovered much later to be very useful for another purpose?
EE links
Research into one or more cases in which mathematical principles which were developed purely for the
sake of expanding our mathematical knowledge but actually turned out to be useful could make an
interesting extended essay. A research question might be: What is the relationship between pure
mathematics and applied mathematics?
Mathematics does not rely on the kind of tools that are used in laboratory science, and for many centuries, the tools
that were used were quite simple: a pencil and paper, a ruler, a mathematical compass and a protractor, plus the
cognitive abilities of the human mind have been the tools which created much of the world’s maths. In recent
decades, the electronic calculator and the computer have been added to the repertoire and have greatly extended the
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
ability to process mathematical concepts beyond what the human mind can do. But the basic methods have been
unchanged for many centuries: logical deduction and rigorous proof remain the primary means by which
mathematical knowledge is extended.
Learner profile
Risk-takers
What role do ambiguity and uncertainty play in our development of mathematical knowledge?
Ambiguity
At the beginning of the chapter, we asked you to solve a problem that eventually required you to use the order of
operations in order to know which steps to take in order to get the correct answer to the problem. That problem is
tricky, because it simply assumes that you know about the order of operations and that you will automatically apply
it. The creator of the problem put the onus on the solver, in other words, rather than taking responsibility themselves
for making sure that the problem was clear. The problem doesn’t really treat the solver fairly, and, as such, it
violates an important value in mathematics: clarity.
The problem at the beginning of the chapter was a relatively simple one, which really had only one possible way to
apply the order of operations. There are problems, however, for which it can be much more difficult to determine
what to do. PEDMAS says, for instance, that we do division and multiplication before addition and subtraction, but
there is not actually a hard rule that we always do division before multiplication, and, in fact, many mathematicians
prefer that multiplication comes first (Dr Peterson).
One example of how a lack of clarity can arise from a confusion that PEDMAS cannot necessarily resolve clearly
can be found in the following problem (Knill):
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is ambiguity a central concern in other AOKs, such as history and the human sciences, as well?
In one famous example, a $125 million satellite was lost in 1999 because a lack of clarity between two different sets
of engineers led to the satellite moving far off course and burning up in the atmosphere of Mars, rather than orbiting
the planet as intended (Hotz). The problem occurred because the engineers who built the satellite used the English
measurement system which relies on inches, feet, and pounds while the people who planned the launch and designed
the flight path used the metric system, which relies on metres, millimetres, and grams (Hotz). It’s hard to say who
was at fault: the builders for not being clear, or the navigation team for failing to validate their assumptions about
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
which system was used. Either way, this example shows us the importance of clarity, accuracy and precision in
applied mathematics.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Who judges the validity of a proof?
These days, it is still good practice for anyone writing out mathematical statements to eliminate all ambiguity by
using notation in such a way that no one has to interpret it using such mnemonics as PEDMAS or BEDMAS. The
onus, in other words, is on the writer, not on the reader.
DEEPER THINKING
Values and ethics
This chapter has pointed out several problems with knowledge-making in mathematics that arise out of
human failure to deliver work which is precise enough to represent important values in mathematics.
There is no written requirement for precision or clarity in the American Mathematical Society’s code of
ethics, though the European Mathematical Society Code of Practice does stipulate that in published
work, the authors must ensure that ‘the mathematical symbols, words, and sentences that are used in
the published work are clear and are not a barrier to understanding’ (European Mathematical Society).
Where the value for precision is formally encoded in the European document, it is not in the document
from the American Mathematical Society.
Are values the same thing as ethics? Is a failure to adhere to the important values of mathematics, or
any other subject area, the same thing as an ethical violation?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Certainty
We have said several times that the standard for knowledge in pure mathematics is absolute certainty.
Given that requirement, any mathematician who declined to provide a satisfactory explanation as to why
their work met that standard would be violating an extremely important value. Any publisher who agreed
to publish such a paper as a proof would also be behaving in an unethical fashion.
We must now, however, acknowledge a problem which has arisen in the late twentieth and early twenty-
first century which challenges the assumption that absolute certainty is possible. Computers can now
generate proofs which are so complicated that they cannot be checked by human minds to the level of
absolute certainty. One example is a proof from 1998 which was submitted for publication by
mathematician Thomas Hales. The proof claims to have proven the Kepler conjecture, dating back to
1611. It has to do with the most efficient way to pack spheres in a box. Hales’ proof, however, involves
40 000 lines of computer-generated explanation, and the whole proof is more than 300 pages long. The
proof was checked by 12 reviewers. ‘After a year they came back to me and said that they were 99 per
cent sure that the proof was correct,’ Hales says. ‘But the reviewers asked to continue their evaluation’
(Khamsi). After four more years of checking, there was no further improvement on that 99 per cent.
The fact that modern technology has made possible mathematical work that cannot be done by a human
or humans has created a problem for existing values and ethical practice. Mathematicians are struggling
with the idea that absolute certainty may have to be dropped as the standard, which would make
mathematics much more like the natural sciences, in which absolute certainty has never been possible
in the same way, since science is based on inductive reasoning. (The differences between mathematical
and scientific reasoning will be discussed in much more detail in Chapter 9.)
If the value placed on absolute certainty has to change, then so will the ethics based on that value.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
To what degree is a desire for certainty an ethical concern in other areas of knowledge? Does that
desire have the same effect on the methods of those areas as it does in mathematics?
ACTIVITY
Before you read the next section, consider how you would answer each of the questions in the following
hypothetical situations. Assume in each case that the death of one person is unavoidable. Which should
the car be programmed to choose and why?
1 Should a self-driving car prioritize the safety of passengers over pedestrians, or pedestrians over
passengers?
2 Should the car hit a homeless person or a wealthy businessperson
3 Should the car hit an elderly woman (someone’s grandmother) or a young person in her twenties?
4 Should the car hit a college student or a factory worker?
5 Would you buy a car which was programmed to use the choice you picked? Would you buy a car
programmed the other way?
Researchers at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology conduced a very large survey (more than 2 million people
in 233 countries) to see if any kind of consensus could be found on questions similar to the ones you answered
above. Interestingly, but perhaps not surprisingly, the patterns of answers were not universal, but were tied to
cultural values in the countries where the respondents lived (Laursen).
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Culture
Use the QR code to watch a video about this study and the ways in which culture affected the ethical
knowledge that people who responded to the survey relied on.
All of these choices are extremely difficult. A person driving a car faced with these choices will likely make an
intuitive decision, but autonomous cars can’t be given intuitions or emotions; they have to be programmed in
advance. Because self-driving cars cannot eliminate all accident-related fatalities, we have to be ready for some
people to be killed in accidents involving self-driving cars. There are difficult moral and ethical questions regarding
how to make the decisions about how the cars should be programmed. Who should decide? Should mathematicians
decide? Engineers? Could individual car buyers decide? We do not currently have answers to these questions, which
is to say, we do not, as a society, or as teams of mathematicians working on the projects, know what the ethical thing
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
is to do. Ideally, before any such decisions are made, a clear set of values will be identified to serve as the
underpinnings for the ethical decision making.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
To what extent do you agree with the mathematician Paul Ernest’s claim that mathematics ‘serves as a
training that shapes thinking in an ethics-free and amoral way’?
ACTIVITY
Discuss and debate the questions below with your classmates.
1 Does the fact that decisions can be made in advance about who a car would be programmed to
choose when a death is unavoidable make the emotional reaction to the loss of that person worse?
2 Do you think people are more likely to believe that it’s better to accept a much greater number of
deaths rather than plan ahead for a relatively small number? (Remember, the Intel mathematics
suggest that automobile-related deaths can be reduced from 40 000 a year in the United States to
only 40.)
The autonomous vehicle is only one example of the way in which developing technologies challenge our ethical
decision-making processes regarding the mathematics that underlie the technology. Think back to Chapter 3, for
example, where we saw the problems that have arisen as a result of the fact that we can use mathematics to track
every click that an individual user makes on the internet. This technology has enabled mathematical algorithms to
choose which content those users are then faced with – ads, news stories and entertainment recommendations. These
problems have not been resolved, and the question as to whether they should be has yet to be satisfactorily
answered.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How might we compare the ethical uncertainty involved in the application of mathematics to the real
world to ethical questions in other areas of knowledge such as history or the human sciences?
Learner profile
Inquirers
What conventions and methods do we use to shape effective scientific inquiry?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Should the natural sciences be regarded as a body of knowledge, a system of knowledge or a method?
Which one of those activities seem more like science to you? Why?
The first activity, as it is described, is science. It is an examination of properties of some aspects of the physical
world – dirt and water. Ultimately, this activity is a chemistry experiment, though a quite simple one. If you actually
did the experiment, and you went and got some dirt and put it in the jar and observed what happened, you were
exploring the nature of the particular chemicals that make up the dirt that you found and how those chemicals
interact with water – the chemical compound H2O, dihydrogen oxide. Possibly, depending on where you got your
water, there were other chemicals present as well.
You observed the reaction that you created, and you formed an hypothesis as to whether it was possible to separate
the dirt back out from the water, and, if so, whether the dirt would look exactly the same as it did when you first put
it in the jar. From this point, you could test your hypothesis by designing an experiment intended to attempt to
separate the two substances. Notice that if you did not actually run this experiment, if, instead, you only sat in your
chair and read about it, you were not doing science. Natural science does not generate knowledge through thought
experiments, though thought experiments might help a scientist develop a hypothesis or design an experiment.
From this basic experiment, you could explore a number of other questions related to the interaction of the
chemicals in your local dirt and water. You could, for example, determine exactly which chemicals are present in
each sample, and then you could start experimenting to discover whether different combinations of chemicals
resulted in the same reaction of dirt and water. You might explore which soil retains water best for growing certain
crops, and which soil dries out too quickly, or stays too wet too long. The initial question that we had about the
reaction between soil and water not only provides us with information about the physical world, it also opens up
many new lines of inquiry. Lest you think that the question about soil is too simple to be useful in the world, you
might be interested to know that there is a whole branch of chemistry called soil chemistry. You can use the QR
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
code on the right to explore a website from the Soil Science Society of America and learn more about the wide range
of research questions that soil scientists pursue.
In contrast to the soil experiment, the dowsing activity, as it is described, is pseudoscience. Pseudoscience is an
interesting term. Before reading on, think of some activities that you might call pseudoscience or which you have
heard others call pseudoscience.
Perhaps you thought of some of these:
• astrology
• psychic readings or fortune-telling
• the search for extraterrestrial life
• flat Earth claims
• Moon landing conspiracy theories
• the belief that ancient astronauts visited the Earth.
Michael Shermer, publisher of Skeptic magazine, argues that the most objective way to differentiate pseudoscience
from science is to test the work against the standard of how testing is done and see whether the findings generate
new questions for other scientists to pursue: ‘That is, does the revolutionary new idea generate any interest on the
part of working scientists for adoption in their research programmes, produce any new lines of research, lead to any
new discoveries, or influence any existing hypotheses, models, paradigms or worldviews? If not, chances are it is
pseudoscience’ (Shermer).
Learner profile
Principled
What is the difference between principled scientific inquiry and pseudoscience?
We saw, with the example of the dirt and water study, that the findings from such a study could open many new
lines of research. On the other hand, the claims of the dowsers have not been scientifically established. The article
admits that dowsers don’t know why it works. They don’t know which kinds of wood are best and they can’t explain
why dowsing only works for some people. They just assert that it does work. We can’t take that ‘finding’ and extend
the research, because there is no evidence that any research took place. We don’t know who can find water by
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
dowsing; we don’t know if demonstrations of dowsing, assuming some have taken place, were controlled in any way
to preclude every possibility of trickery. We don’t really know if any water has ever been found using a dowsing
stick.
ACTIVITY
We could, of course, decide we wanted to subject dowsing to scientific study.
1 What hypothesis might you formulate as the basis for your study?
2 What are some questions you could ask and how could you test your hypotheses?
3 What would the experiment look like?
4 Why do you think that scientific studies of this sort have not been carried out by dowsers?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Perspectives
‘Pseudoscience’ is a bit of an odd term, as it is only applied to activities by people who are not engaged
in those activities. Dowsers do not call themselves pseudoscientists; they call themselves ‘dowsers’ or
‘diviners’. Whether a person calls an activity pseudoscience or not is, therefore, a matter of perspective.
There are two main situations in which people use the term ‘pseudoscience’:
• Often what some people call pseudoscience is not science at all, and the term is used to express
displeasure that the activity is being presented as science, or that it challenges the findings of science.
Creationism, for example, is often called pseudoscience, but it would be more precise to say that
creationism is not science. You learned about the methods for making knowledge in religions in
Chapter 6. We will explore the methods of science in more detail later in this chapter, but you can
already see that the methods of science – which begin with observation of the natural world – are
different from the methods of religious knowledge systems. This difference does not mean that
religious knowledge is not knowledge; it is just different from scientific knowledge, and those people
who denounce it as pseudoscience are not applying accurate language to describe it.
• Another perspective on the concept of pseudoscience is that ‘pseudoscience’ is a word that is applied
to activities which are in some ways related to science. For example, the dowsing activity above claims
to reveal knowledge about the physical properties of the Universe, but does not use the methods of
science to develop this knowledge.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
In the natural sciences, reliability is established in part through careful experimental design. What
features of knowledge in the other areas of knowledge help us to determine its reliability? Are those
features more similar to or more different from the experimental design of the natural sciences?
The question of whether some activity is science, pseudoscience or not science at all, is a good one for us to consider
at the beginning of this chapter because it helps us to identify the central defining characteristics of science. That is,
natural science is the study of the physical properties of the Universe, and that study is undertaken systematically,
with the aim of producing knowledge which is as objectively and certainly established as possible. Scientific
knowledge is developed from observation, analysis and reason, and does not rely on opinion or thought experiments.
Hypotheses are developed as a matter of speculation; however, they remain formally hypothetical until demonstrated
by careful study. In the rest of this chapter, we will consider the complexities of the subject and the means by which
we come to call something scientific knowledge.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What knowledge, if any, is likely to always remain beyond the capabilities of science to investigate or
verify?
The natural sciences can be categorized in broad terms which are probably familiar to you: physics, chemistry, and
biology, but within those broad categories you will find many, more focused, subcategories. Table 9.1 shows some
of the subcategories you can find under the umbrella of biology, for example:
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Are other AOKs organized into disciplines in ways similar to the way that knowledge in the natural
sciences is? How does the organization affect the knowledge which is produced?
There are many more branches of biology, and of course the branches sometimes overlap with each other and with
fields in chemistry and physics. Biophysicists, for example, use the methods of physics, which includes such
methods as the application of complex mathematics to physical problems, to questions about how biological systems
work. Biophysicists have done work with how DNA can cause cells to change into cancer, how plants can take
sunlight and convert it into food, and how nerve cells communicate (‘What is Biophysics?’).
Within the narrower fields of a branch of natural science, even further specialization exists: an entomologist might
be any of the following (Bueza):
There are other specialties within the field of entomology. Some entomologists take a different approach to
entomology, and they focus on particular types of insects, such as bees, and study those from several of the different
perspectives that are mentioned above. Someone might, for example, spend an entire career studying the ecology,
morphology, pathology, physiology and taxonomy of honey bees. The study of bees is called melittology. The
diagram on the right gives you an idea of where that person fits in to the larger category of the natural sciences:
When you begin to consider all the hundreds, or even thousands, of different combinations of specialties which are
possible within any one of the major branches of the natural sciences, you begin to get a sense of the far-reaching
scope of the sciences.
ACTIVITY
Go to the website of a university near you (or any university which interests you) and look up a professor
in one of the sciences. Find his or her particular specialty and then see if you can place that specialty in
the chain of categories and subcategories of science. Draw a diagram like the one for the bee specialist
above that represents the relationship of that person’s specialty to the pertinent categories.
There are similar applications of the study of plants and other animals. Yellow and Dalmation toadflax are two
closely related kinds of weed that were introduced to North America in the nineteenth century through a
combination of accidental transport by travellers and deliberate introduction as ornamental plants. They have spread
throughout North America, and, because they have no natural predators, these plants have caused significant
economic impact to agriculture, as the toadflax plants crowd out crop plants. Some of the crops which have been
affected include grain, oil seed and oil mint, berries and small fruits (Sing, et al). Biologists have studied the
problem of these two toadflaxes and have developed methods for eradicating them, the most effective of which
involves a biological approach – that is, using other biological entities such as other plants and insects to wipe out
the toadflax.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can the knowledge from other AOKs be used to solve real-world problems in the same way that
knowledge from the natural sciences can?
One widespread and common application of biology is the preservation of endangered species. Biologists studying
grizzly bears, for example, have helped in the restoration of the grizzly bear population in Yellowstone and Grand
Teton National Parks in Wyoming, in the United States. In 1975, there were an estimated 136 bears in the area, but
by April 2019, due to legal protections and careful management, there were an estimated 718 bears in the same area
(National Park Service). The species was temporarily taken off the endangered species list but was restored in the
fall of 2018.
CAS links
The International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) lists 16 306 endangered species of plants
and animals as of early 2019 (Kasnoff). You could engage in a CAS project or a series of activities to
find out what species are endangered in your area and to educate your classmates and your local
community about them and about what could be done to help them. You might arrange guest speakers
to come to the school. You could organize fundraisers, or you could volunteer at local organizations
engaged in preservation work. As a creative activity, you could create artwork of the endangered species
to help familiarize people with them.
Chemistry
Broadly speaking, Biology deals with the nature of things on the large scale, seeking answers to questions such as,
‘What is a plant and how does it work?’ and ‘What is an animal and how does it work?’ Biologists are concerned
with plants and animals as systems, and they want to know how these systems work, both in terms of the individual
living thing and in terms of how they work in the systems in which they live. Chemistry, on the other hand, deals
with the fundamental nature of things in terms of what substances they are made of on the molecular level.
Two main branches of chemistry are organic and inorganic chemistry. The difference between the two is that they
deal with different elements on the periodic table of elements.
ACTIVITY
Think about the objects you use every day – from your toothbrush to your mobile phone to a car or bus.
Is there any manufactured product in twenty-first-century society that did not require some knowledge of
chemistry, either in its design or in its production?
Despite the fact that organic chemists normally work with many fewer elements than inorganic chemists do, both
organic and inorganic chemistry have applications in a wide variety of situations. Table 9.3 is a list of just a few of
those applications, according to the American Chemical Society.
CASE STUDY
Using chemistry to solve global problems
In April 2018, the international organization Earth Day Network reported the amount of disposable
plastics that are used around the world in a year. Some of these figures are shown in Table 9.4.
Table 9.4 Quantities of disposable plastic objects used around the world (Source: Earth Day Network
March 2018)
Disposable plastic object Quantity used
Plastic water bottles 1 000 000 per minute
Plastic drinking straws Half a billion every day
Plastic bags 4 trillion annually, of which only 1% are returned for
recycling
Disposable cups (including Styrofoam coffee 500 billion a year
cups)
Very little of the plastics that is used every year ends up being recycled, and a great deal of it ends up in
the oceans. A study published in 2016 by the World Economic Forum found that 32 per cent of 78 million
tons of plastic packaging ends up in the ocean every year. To try to help you understand that quantity
better, that’s the same as pouring one garbage truck full of plastic trash into the ocean every minute.
That is expected to rise to four trucks per minute by 2050, at which point there will be more plastic in the
ocean than fish (Pennington).
According to the World Economic Forum, another 40 per cent of the plastic we use ends up in landfill
sites, with a further 14 per cent incinerated or used in other energy-producing processes. Meanwhile,
just 14 per cent is collected for recycling, of which more than a quarter is lost in the recycling process
and more than half is recycled into lower-value types of plastic. This means that only 2 per cent of the
plastic packaging that we use is recycled for use in the same or a similar-quality application, for
example, used plastic bottles being remade into new plastic bottles (this is known as closed-loop
recycling).
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Chemists are working on trying to help solve this problem. The first step has been the development of
biodegradable plastics – products which result from the work of both organic and inorganic chemists.
Biodegradable plastics have not proven to be the magic bullet solution that everyone hoped for,
however. In 2016, a team of scientists from Ireland and Belgium found that many biodegradable plastics
do not, in fact, degrade under conditions in which most people put them. Some do not degrade in
landfills or compost, and some require very high temperatures in order to degrade (‘Biodegradable
Plastic’). They did find, however, that because some plastics degrade under anaerobic conditions (that
is, under conditions where no oxygen is present), and because that process produces biogas, there is a
potential for developing plastics which consumers could compost at home and convert to biogas, which
could be used to power their homes (‘Biodegradable Plastic’). Obviously, this is a futuristic idea, one
which will not be available in the short term, but this is an excellent example of the way in which
knowledge of chemistry can be used to help solve global problems.
EE links
Western countries used to send their recycling waste to China and other Asian countries to be recycled.
However, now that China has become more prosperous, it has no need to employ people to sort the
materials by hand in order to pick out what can actually be recycled and what has to be burned or put in
landfill because it is actually trash. China, alongside Malaysia and Vietnam, have drastically reduced
their acceptance of recycling, or have even stopped altogether, and, in some cases, have sent
thousands of tons of it back (Joyce). This has caused a significant problem for towns which cannot afford
to pay vastly higher fees for recycling, and many locales have stopped recycling altogether – sending
materials consumers thought were being recycled to incinerators, which results in increased carbon
emissions (Semuels).
The global problem of recycling could be an excellent topic for an extended essay in economics. A
potential research question might be: ‘Can cost-effective methods of recycling be developed in the wake
of the withdrawal of many Asian countries from importing trash for recycling?’ Another possible research
question for an extended essay in economics could be: ‘How can chemistry help make solving the global
problem of plastic waste economically feasible?’
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How might developments in scientific knowledge trigger political controversies or controversies in other
areas of knowledge?
Physics
So far, we have seen that biologists study the nature of plants and animals in terms of the ways in which their
biological systems function, while chemists study the nature of all physical objects, including living ones, in terms
ACTIVITY
Before you read on in this section, see if you can list ten objects that you have used in your personal life
which have been created with the help of knowledge from physics.
Now try to think of ten more inventions or processes which involve physics but which you may not have
experienced directly for yourself.
Because physics involves the study of motion, energy and forces, any invention which requires any of those things
results from knowledge gained in the study of physics. Some of the applications of physics are described below.
• The design of wheels: The wheel is a device that works on principles of physics, so any machine that uses a
wheel depends on knowledge of physics. We might guess that the very first wheels were developed on a trial-and-
error basis, rather than being deliberately constructed using knowledge of physics, but nowadays wheel design is a
highly technical business. In bicycle racing, for example, the weight of the wheel and the design of the spokes can
make a big difference in the amount of work that the rider has to put in order to move the cycle forward. You
probably never think of the physics of your bicycle when you get on it, but they are actually quite complicated: ‘A
bicycle wheel needs to be able to handle a variety of forces. Besides holding up the weight of the cyclist, a wheel
must withstand the forces of pedalling and braking and the jarring effects of the road surface’ (Krizek).
• The development of corrective lenses for improved vision: The knowledge that we have of the human eye and
how we can see, comes from biology and physics. The chemistry of the eye also comes into play to explain how
the rods and cones help us to distinguish colour (Chen, et al). The anatomy of the eye, as shown in the drawing
below, is a matter of biology, but the way that the structures of the eye interact with light is a matter of physics. In
a person who does not need glasses, the light coming into the eye is bent by the lens just the right amount so that it
hits the retina just at the point where the light rays converge (Chen, et al).
‘Converge’ means to come together. The diagram below shows how the lens of the eye takes the light waves
reflecting off a particular object and focuses them together so that they all hit a single point on the retina
simultaneously. This image is of normal vision – when the light waves converge just at the retina, the object is in
focus.
Two of the most common problems with eyes is when there is an issue with the lens which makes the light rays
converge too soon or too late. In a person who is near-sighted, the lens of the eye converges light rays from distant
objects too soon, so that they cross in front of the retina. This makes far away objects appear blurry (OpenStax
College). In a person who is far-sighted, the lens of the eye fails to converge light rays from nearby objects in
time, so they do not converge before they hit the retina. This makes nearby objects blurry (OpenStax College). By
using knowledge of physics, the optometrist (the doctor who tests your eyesight) can prescribe the right kind of
lens which will compensate for the failure of the lens in the eye. The optician (the person who makes your glasses)
can create the properly ground lens to fill the prescription.
• Medical applications of physics: If you’ve ever had an X-ray taken, then you’ve experienced one of the many
medical applications of physics. Knowledge of physics is responsible for many developments in medical
technology that allow doctors to treat a wide range of diseases. Radiology for looking at damage to bones, laser
surgery, sonograms, which allow doctors to check on the health of developing fetuses, fMRI (functional magnetic
resonance imaging), which measures minute changes in blood flow and so provides a way to look at activity in the
brain (Radiological Society of North America) and radiation therapy for cancer are all possible because of
knowledge made in physics. The invention of the scanning tunnelling microscope in 1982 earned its inventors,
Gerd Binning and Heinrich Rohrer, the 1986 Nobel Prize for Physics. That invention opened the door to the use of
nanotechnology in medicine, which can now be used for targeted delivery of drugs to very specific areas of the
body as well as for cancer treatment (El-Sherbini).
• Mobile phones: Physics also made possible the mobile phone. Here are two main ways in which knowledge of
physics contributes to your being able to carry a phone around in your pocket and to make calls whenever you
want to, wherever you are.
1 Your voice, which consists of soundwaves, has to be converted to an electrical signal – radio waves – which
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
travel to wherever they need to go and then they are converted back to soundwaves by the phone of the person
you are talking to (Institute of Physics).
2 To be able to talk on the phone while moving around, or to talk to someone who is very far away, you need a
cellular network. The phone itself can broadcast radio waves for a short distance, and its antenna can collect
waves from a short distance. The phone, therefore, sends the waves to a nearby tower and the tower sends them
on to the next tower, and so on. There are about 800 frequencies available in any one network, and you need
two of them – one frequency for talking and one for hearing (Institute of Physics). So, 400 simultaneous
conversations could use up all the frequencies; however, as your conversation is sent from one cell of the
network to the next, the two frequencies you were just using can be picked up by another conversation in that
cell. Knowledge of how sound waves work is knowledge of physics, and that knowledge allowed for the design
of cellular networks.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
This example of the study of the eye reveals that the different fields within the natural sciences often
function together to solve problems. What are some ways that the same thing happens in other areas of
knowledge, such as the human sciences or the arts?
Many other modern technologies depend on knowledge of physics: cars, airplanes, military weaponry (including the
atomic bomb), spacecraft and satellites are some of the technological developments that have had a significant
impact on human life in the last century. In Chapter 8, we took a detailed look at how mathematics helped to put a
man on the Moon. The mathematics was developed to model the physical processes of motion and force which were
known because of physics.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
The natural sciences rely heavily on material tools and technological developments in the production of
Did you think of any of these? This is, of course, a very small list of the ways in which physics can be applied in the
world and beyond.
We have now seen how knowledge from all three major branches of the natural sciences have widespread
applications that reach across the Earth and into outer space. Those applications affect billions of people by aiding
them in nearly all the activities in which they engage on a regular basis. As with mathematics, the scope of the
natural sciences, though focused on a particular kind of knowledge, is nearly limitless.
ACTIVITY
Do you think that scientific knowledge functions similarly for the Indigenous cultures that you read about
in Chapter 5 as it does in highly technological society? Why or why not?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do differing perspectives in the other AOKs, such as history and the arts, extend our knowledge of the
world, cause complications in our understanding, or both?
CASE STUDY
The Big Bang theory
An example of this in the present day is the ongoing discussion about the origin of the Universe and the
implications for the nature of reality depending on what the origin was. The Big Bang theory is a widely
held explanation for how the Universe began. It says that about 14 billion years ago, all matter was
compressed into a tiny particle smaller than a single grain of sand, and all at once it exploded, starting
the expansion of matter which eventually became what we know of as the Universe (‘The Big Bang’).
Much about the Big Bang is generally agreed upon, but there is a lot of disagreement about what such a
beginning means for what will happen in the future, and even about what it suggests about how many
universes there are. The diagram above shows some of the competing ideas about what happened and
what it might mean (Tate).
The main difference between these two ideas is shown in the green boxes. If the Universe is expanding
eternally, without any end, then a logical conclusion that can be drawn is that new universes are coming
into existence all the time, without limit. This concept is called the multiverse. One objection to the idea
that there are multiple universes is that the laws of physics could be different in each one. Cambridge
physics professor Stephen Hawking, in the final paper he wrote, which was published shortly after his
death in 2018, rejected this idea because it ultimately negates Einstein’s theory of relativity. Hawking
and his co-author, Thomas Hertog, proposed a different model based in string theory and which
proposes that the Universe is finite (University of Cambridge). In the present day, there is insufficient
evidence to demonstrate the truth of either of these ideas.
The model of the oscillating universe provides a very different explanation for the nature of the Universe.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
That model suggests that matter in the Universe is not expanding infinitely, but that rather it will reach a
point at which it will start collapsing again and will end in a hypothetical Big Crunch. Then, the
hypothesis suggests, the process will begin again with another Big Bang. In this model, we may be living
in the very first Universe following the very first Big Bang, or we could be living in a later cycle, after an
undetermined number of Big Bang–Big Crunch cycles (Villanueva). A number of different variations of
this model have been proposed, beginning in the 1920s, when Einstein considered the possibility. Each
time a new proposal is put forward, physicists have found significant problems with it in terms of its
violating the basic laws of physics. There are recent models which attempt to resolve those problems,
but they too are problematic and the most recent evidence, including work on dark matter, seems to be
leading toward the negation of this possibility (Villanueva).
Other ideas have been proposed to explain the fundamental nature of the Universe and what will happen
to it in the future. These ideas have arisen out of more recent developments in physics involving
quantum mechanics and string theory. One is that the Universe is actually something like a hologram
projected onto the surface of a sphere. This idea was proposed by two physicists, Leonard Susskind at
Stanford and Gerard ‘t Hooft, a Dutch physicist, in response to a problem that Stephen Hawking
discovered with regard to the loss of matter in black holes. The idea was initially thought to be very
bizarre; however, an Argentinian physicist, Juan Maldecena, worked out a mathematical principle – the
Holographic Principle – which supports the metaphor of the Universe as a holograph. The idea of the
Universe as a holograph is taken much more seriously now (The Good Stuff); nevertheless, it is not
definitively established. If you would like to know more about the idea of the holographic universe, you
can use the QR code to watch a video with Leonard Susskind explaining the idea.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Evidence
These different versions of the nature of the Universe rely on different kinds of evidence. The evidence
related to the expanding universe is physical – scientists can look at events which occurred shortly after
the Big Bang. Light travels at a fixed speed per year, and past events can be seen when the light which
they gave off reaches us. The evidence for the holographic model, however, is of an entirely different
sort: it consists of theorizing about what must be true given facts that we know – very much as
mathematical knowledge is made. And, in fact, mathematics exists to support that model. The evidence
for one kind of idea is physical and the evidence for the other is based in logic. The kind of evidence
being used gives us a window into one fundamental difference in these two perspectives.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How is the kind of evidence used in the natural sciences similar to or different from the kind of evidence
used in the human sciences and history?
It is important to note that the discussion here of the various explanations for the nature of the Universe are
simplified. Our intention is not to provide you with a detailed explanation of physics; rather we want to demonstrate
the ways in which scientists working from different perspectives can see data in different ways and draw different
conclusions about them. In a case such as the problem of the nature of the Universe, there is no comprehensive
theory. The different perspectives are important because they ensure that questions keep being asked and
assumptions keep getting challenged.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Which other AOKs rely on models to help provide explanations, or possible explanations, for phenomena
under study?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What role do paradigm shifts play in the progression of scientific knowledge?
A paradigm is essentially a system of beliefs about how things are. We have paradigms for many things in our lives.
You probably have paradigms for the way your family operates, for what school is like, and for the role of a
smartphone in your life, among many others. You can think of a paradigm as being a set of rules or explanations
which reflect your understanding of the world. These paradigms might seem to be set in stone – unchangeable – but
we can actually imagine that something might happen to change them. Imagine a family, for example, which has
always been quite poor. The family interactions are shaped around the need for all family members to work and
contribute to the family finances. It has always been this way, and it seems that it always will be. Now imagine that
something happens to make the family much more financially stable. Say the father inherits a fortune from some
relative he didn’t know he had. Now the family dynamic might change quite a bit. Perhaps the mother and children
give up their jobs and the children go to better schools. The family might move to a bigger house where all the
children have their own rooms, so the expectations about sharing space and possessions changes dramatically. And
so on. That change would be a paradigm shift. All the expectations, rules and beliefs about what can and should
happen in that family change because of the new situation.
Learner profile
Open-minded
Why is being open-minded an important trait for a scientist to possess?
In science, paradigm shifts work the same way. A particular way of viewing the world is widely held among
scientists based on evidence which has been discovered and explained. Over time, however, problems arise with that
evidence – or, very commonly, new evidence is discovered, and a challenge is made to the existing paradigm. We
saw a process of ideas and counter-ideas very similar to this when we looked at the varying hypotheses about the
nature of the Universe. Those relating to the Big Bang theory and the expanding universe have been widely held for
a long time, but the explanations have not been solidified into a paradigm; there have always been problems and
questions, and there continue to be problems and questions now. Alternative hypotheses have been presented, but we
don’t have a paradigm shift because we don’t have a system which fits all the facts, and which satisfies the scientific
community in general.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Does paradigm shift function in other AOKs, such as history or mathematics? If so, how is it similar to or
different from paradigm shift in the sciences?
There are actually remnants of this idea in modern culture: many people still think of the lion as being the king of
beasts, for example (Brake 90).
An example of a paradigm shift can be seen in the shift from an Aristotelian classification of all living things to the
classification system which was developed by Carl Linnaeus in 1735.
Before Linnaeus proposed his system of classification, the dominant perspective was that living things existed in a
strict hierarchy, in which each plant or animal was lesser than all those above it in the hierarchy. There was one long
chain of being. Linnaeus’ system rearranged the whole perception of the relation of living things to each other by
introducing groups: he proposed three kingdoms, and then, within those very large groups, a series of increasingly
smaller groups. He retained some of the old idea of the hierarchy by organizing hierarchies within the groups, but he
did away with the one long chain of being.
The Linnaean system of classification is still with us today, although it has been revised, including two major
changes: we no longer use it to classify non-living things, and the hierarchical arrangement of kingdoms and orders
has been dropped. We now view all members of the same level of classification as being equal; this change
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
represents another paradigm shift which arose largely out of the Darwinian revolution. Linnaeus’ classification
showed how living creatures are related to each other, but it made no attempt to explain how those relationships
came to be. Only when Darwin proposed the theory of evolution did we get that explanation. The development and
acceptance of the theory of evolution, which completely altered our understanding of species development, may
have been the biggest paradigm shift in the history of biology.
TOK trap
Many students want to write about the Copernican Revolution in their TOK essays, often using it as an
example of a paradigm shift. There is nothing wrong with the idea of doing so, but far too often students
are not careful about their facts. They think that they know something about Copernicus and the shift
from the geocentric universe to the heliocentric universe, and too often students make the mistake of
relying on sweeping generalizations which are, in fact, wrong. To give just one example: as we noted in
Chapter 1, Nicolaus Copernicus published his theory of the heliocentric universe in a book entitled De
Revolutionibus in March of 1543, and then died two months later. The Catholic Church did not ban the
book until 1616 (Solis). You can use the QR code on the right to read more about the history of
Copernicus and the Catholic Church.
Galileo, on the other hand, was indicted for his ‘heretical support for Copernicus’ heliocentrism’ (Linder)
in 1616. An important idea to take away from this TOK trap is that it is always going to be wise to do
some research about any example you wish to use in your TOK essay, rather than trying to rely on easy
generalizations or ‘facts’ you think you know from some time in the past.
ACTIVITY
Discuss the following question with your classmates:
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
How does a paradigm shift represent a shift in perspective?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What methods are used to establish reliability in other areas of knowledge?
CASE STUDY
Evolution and belief
One reason given for the denial of evolution is that it violates a literal interpretation of the Christian Bible,
which says that God created all the creatures of Earth. A very strict interpretation of that text in the book
of Genesis means that all living things exist today as they existed after the six days of creation. Perhaps
the first very serious challenge to this belief came in the nineteenth century when ships began to arrive
in England with fossils of Woolly Mammoths, a clearly extinct species whose bones were unlike any
those of any known living animal (Conniff). Determined adherents to the biblical story, however, propose
that fossils are not evidence that some of God’s creations no longer exist, but that, rather, they are traps
laid by the devil to sway people from God’s word (IBSS).
In the United States, efforts by some religious groups continue to try to remove the teaching of evolution
in public school biology classes, or, failing that, to mandate the teaching of creationism alongside
evolution. This stance, too, is very controversial, as creationism is not science, and there is much
resistance to its being forced into the science curriculum. These strongly felt positions persist despite the
fact that many religious organizations have accepted the theory of evolution as being compatible with
religious history and doctrine. The official attitude toward evolution from the Catholic Church, for
example, has changed dramatically over time. In 1950, in an official statement, Pope Pius XII declared
that he hoped that the theory of evolution would prove to be a passing fad, but that ‘nothing in Catholic
doctrine is contradicted by a theory that suggests one specie might evolve into another – even if that
specie is man’ (Linder). Forty-six years later, however, Pope John-Paul, in a similar official statement,
acknowledged evolution as ‘proven fact’ (Linder).
Many organized religions have formally accepted evolution, at least in the sense that they have
acknowledged that the theory of evolution is not incompatible with religious doctrine. Table 9.5 shows
the position, determined by the Pew Research Center, of a number of different religious organizations
(Liu).
There are, however, three religions in the Pew study which expressly deny the validity of the theory of
evolution. These are shown in Table 9.6 (Liu).
We are left, then, with a perplexing situation: scientists and most religious leaders accept the theory of
evolution as being an accurate description of the means by which the species that exist today have
come to be. It is: ‘one of the best substantiated theories in the history of science, supported by evidence
from a wide variety of scientific disciplines, including palaeontology, geology, genetics and
developmental biology’ (Than). The fact that work from so many different fields of inquiry supports the
theory of evolution makes the knowledge that much sounder, as it coheres across many disciplines of
science. You learned about correspondence and coherence theory in Chapter 2 (see page 45); the
theory of evolution is an example of knowledge which can be tested using both of those theories.
Despite the complexity of the knowledge which has gone into the theory of evolution, and despite the
fact that physical evidence going back millions of years supports it, it remains controversial among some
groups. This is a good example of the difficulty of conveying knowledge (especially complicated
knowledge) from experts to the general population.
Widespread denial of evolution is a striking problem in the United States. A 2006 study of 32 European
countries demonstrated that only one, Turkey, was less likely to accept evolution than the US (Hecht),
though significant percentages of people in other countries also reject evolution. The chart illustrates the
findings of the study. The highest acceptance of evolution occurred in Iceland, Denmark, and Sweden
(Miller, et al ).
In 2014, a Pew Research study found that a third of people living in the US reject evolution outright
(Norman), despite the official positions of a wide variety of religious authorities as shown on the previous
page. Half of those claim, wrongly, that scientists are not in agreement that evolution is real. The same
survey showed that 98 per cent of scientists accept evolution as biological fact (Norman).
One professor has suggested that the reason for the extremely high incidence of denial of evolution in
the US is a result of the fact that in the US, the issue has been politicized, with one political party making
it a major issue in its platform (Hecht). This choice appeals to religious fundamental groups, and they
have fought, often successfully, to keep evolution from being taught. Such groups require creationism to
be taught in biology classes alongside evolution, or, perhaps even more dangerously, ensure that when
evolution is taught, it is presented, falsely, as being scientifically dubious. A report from 2007 revealed
that: ‘1 in 8 public high school biology teachers presented creationism as being scientifically credible,
and 6 in 10 were teaching evolution in a way that misrepresented its scientific soundness’ (Norman).
The theory of evolution is an excellent example of how certain cultural attitudes can have a widespread
influence on how scientific knowledge is received in a country as a whole.
The denial of evolution based on arguments that it is not science, or that it is scientifically dubious, or that
creationism is an equally sound scientific finding, represents a profound misunderstanding of what science is and
how scientific knowledge is made. In the next section, we will explore the methods used by scientists in order to
establish claims as being scientifically sound.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
ACTIVITY
Biologists are the people with the experience, education and understanding of the science behind
evolution. The heads of religious organizations are the experts in religious doctrine and official church
policy. Some people, however, reject the knowledge claims made by both of these kinds of efforts, even
though the vast majority of people in those groups trust science every day when they go to see a doctor,
use a cell phone, ride in a car over a bridge, travel to the 32nd floor of a high rise in an elevator, or get
on a plane.
1 What makes it difficult for some people to accept the expertise of those who have undergone the kind
of education needed in order for them to become experts?
2 How do we resolve conflicts if experts flatly disagree?
3 Under what conditions do our values help us gain accurate knowledge of the world, and under what
conditions do our values hinder our ability to gain accurate knowledge of the world?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
We have seen that sometimes experts in the natural sciences are effective in influencing the
consumption of knowledge and sometimes they are not. Are experts in other areas of knowledge equally
regarded and disregarded? Why or why not?
ACTIVITY
Evolution is not the only scientific finding which has not been easily received by the public. Well-known
controversial topics include the safety of vaccines and the fact that human activity has contributed in a
very significant way to rapid global warming. Others include the safety of nuclear power and the need for
embryonic testing. All of these are accepted by scientists but have not been universally accepted by the
public.
1 Think of at least one area of settled scientific knowledge which causes controversy in your community
and explore the reasons for that conflict.
2 Do you think the conflict arises from the personal perspectives of individuals? From a lack of clear
communication and education? Or perhaps from important cultural beliefs?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is there a single ‘scientific’ method?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Do other AOKs employ a method similar to the scientific method?
Which features of the scientific method help people to make knowledge in other areas?
This simple experiment helps to demonstrate the basic procedure of how scientists do science, but as it stands, it is
not nearly precise enough. There are two main problems:
• the hypothesis has two parts, rather than just one. We can’t effectively test two things at one time because we
won’t know what in the experiment affected which part of the hypothesis
• the prediction is too vague. It doesn’t specify how much water or how much dirt, or what kind of dirt. Sand might
not produce the same results as the kind of dirt which is used on farms to grow things, and possibly both of those
would produce different results from what would happen if red clay soil were used.
The fact that scientists would not make such a vague prediction underscores the very important point that scientists
don’t make claims which apply outside of the conditions in which they made the observations and in which they
conducted the test of the hypothesis. Scientists are concerned with making the most precise claims that they possibly
can, and in order to be able to do that, they must be very accurate about what they observe and what they think the
implications of those observations are.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do the underlying assumptions which shape inquiry in other AOKs, such as mathematics or history,
compare and contrast to the underlying assumptions of the natural sciences?
Let’s consider these assumptions. The first two mean that the pursuit of scientific knowledge must be, first and
foremost, based in observation. Scientists are trying to observe what is really there, outside of ourselves, and to
understand it. We see those beliefs reflected in the first stages of the scientific method: that observation is the
starting place, and then a hypothesis is made based on observation.
The third assumption is quite interesting. It is purely an assumption which is based in the fact that we cannot observe
supernatural acts, test our ideas about supernatural acts or make predictions about what supernatural acts will happen
next. The nature of supernatural acts, if they exist, is completely different from the nature of observable physical
phenomena: by definition, omnipotent beings capable of creating the Universe, for example, can do anything and are
not controlled by forces outside of themselves. There is, therefore, no way to predict what they might do. This
assumption is reflected in scientific method in the fact that scientific knowledge must be predictive. If we cannot
take what we have observed and tested and make accurate predictions about what will happen the next time and in
all future times, then we do not have scientific knowledge.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How can it be that scientific knowledge changes over time?
The fourth assumption expresses an acknowledgement that humans (including scientists!) can make mistakes, and
the requirement that other people must be able to do the same experiment and get the same results is a reflection of
that awareness. Scientists are not satisfied with one person’s word that natural processes work in a particular way.
The process of scientists checking each other’s work is called replication.
The final assumption on the list above accounts for a number of features of the way that scientific knowledge is
generated. First, it contributes to the need for findings to be expressed in very precise knowledge claims. Since
knowledge in science is contingent, then it matters that we make transparent exactly what the conditions are under
which the knowledge claim is true. Good science does not consist of claims which cover a whole bunch of
circumstances – if scientists are not precise, then the knowledge claims they make are even more contingent and
even more likely to be overturned in the short term.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
How do the underlying assumptions of the other AOKs shape the kind of inquiry, including methods and
tools, that is central to that AOK?
Secondly, this fifth assumption contributes to the need for peer review of scientific findings. We accept that
scientific knowledge is contingent, but we do not think that means we can be sloppy about work and careless about
claims and then just shrug when our claims are overturned. Quite the opposite. Scientists take care not to make
claims until they are thoroughly checked and established beyond reasonable doubt, under the conditions which
currently exist. Peer review is a way for scientists to check each other’s work, to validate the processes used to
generate claims, and to correct any errors in reasoning that may have marred the findings.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Objectivity
Another important reason for peer review is that scientific knowledge must be made as objectively as
possible. The aim of science is to find out about the world as it is, not as scientists think or feel or believe
or wish it to be. One function of the scientific method is to screen out as much as possible any bias or
subjectivity on the part of the scientist, and peer review acts as a final check for any such interference
with facts.
Another method which arises from the fifth assumption is the ongoing development of new technologies and
continuing research in fields about which we already know a great deal. The microscope and the telescope are both
examples of technological developments that allowed scientists to see parts of the physical universe previously
inaccessible to humans, given our limited eyesight. Both of those developments led to major changes in scientific
understanding. We don’t know what technological advances might yet open up the world, and so the effort to
develop them continues. With every new invention, scientists revisit past findings.
The fact that scientific findings are contingent also means that we cannot prove things in science the way that we can
prove them in mathematics. In creating proofs, mathematicians are able to account for every conceivable instance of
what they are studying. We saw in Chapter 8 that in proving the Pythagorean Theorem, Pythagoras was able to
demonstrate that the theorem accurately described every possible right triangle. Scientists cannot do the same thing:
for example, no scientist could ever observe every green plant that exists, let alone all the ones which might exist in
the future, to show that they use photosynthesis to create food for themselves from light.
Natural scientists, then, do not try to prove things, and when peers attempt to replicate an experiment to see whether
the findings were sound, they do not try to prove the original scientist right; instead they try to prove them wrong.
This process is called falsification. If an attempt to falsify a scientific claim succeeds, then the claim is wrong. If an
attempt to falsify a claim fails, however, then the original claim is strengthened. If the claim is repeatedly supported
by experiment, then it becomes stronger and, over time, may rise to the level of a theory, especially if the claim fits
in with knowledge about how related processes work.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Do other areas of knowledge have published sets of underlying assumptions like the natural sciences
do?
Are the underlying assumptions of other areas, such as the human sciences, significantly different from
the assumptions which underly the natural sciences?
Finally, this assumption is the reason that scientists call established frameworks ‘theories’, rather than ‘proofs’ or
‘facts’. Scientists don’t call anything a theory until enough evidence has been amassed to make the knowledge
virtually certain. But in science, because the process is inductive, rather than deductive (see the discussion of
certainty in Chapter 1 for a review), knowledge claims can never be absolutely certain, the way they can in
mathematics. Scientists are, as we noted earlier, concerned about precision. It would not be precise to call theories
proofs, because no matter how well established they are, they might be altered at some point in the future based on
new evidence.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Certainty
In the natural sciences, we can be absolutely certain only about things over which we have control,
which is to say, things which have been invented by humans. We are absolutely certain about the names
of species under Linnaean classification, because those names have been assigned by humans. If those
who have the authority to do so decided to, they could change some of those names, and then we would
be absolutely certain about the new names. This is what happened with Pluto in 2006. The International
Astronomical Union (IAU) redesignated Pluto as a dwarf planet (‘Pluto and Ceres’). The IAU is the group
with the authority to determine the classification of astral bodies, and so we are absolutely certain that
Pluto is not a planet, but rather is a dwarf planet. At some future date, the IAU might develop still more
categories and then there will be new names, and we will be absolutely certain about those names.
Notice that although we can say that we are absolutely certain about aspects of science that we invent
(which very often involves the naming of things), this does not mean that that reality will not change in
future. Where we can actually alter reality, we can be certain of the reality until we change it, and then
we will be absolutely certain about the change that we made. The same cannot be said of natural
objects and natural processes which are not invented by humans. By definition, they are those things
which would exist even if we were not around to observe them. We do not have control over how those
work; scientists are in the business of discovering them.
A theory, such as the theory of evolution, is a framework for explaining a natural process, or
constellation of processes, which is extremely well established. The basic existence of evolution as a
mechanism through which species develop and go extinct over long periods of time is thoroughly settled.
There is virtually no chance that the whole notion of evolution will ever be proven wrong. But the
existence of a theory doesn’t mean that learning stops. Scientists continue to study the details of
evolution and how it has played out in different species over millions of years. All of the increasingly
accurate understanding that has been developed in the last 100 years or so, however, has fit into the
paradigm of evolution. Nothing has occurred to cause any significant challenge to the understanding that
species develop through small genetic changes, and there is no reason to think that there ever will be
any finding that could undermine the idea of evolution in a significant way. The possibility, however
minute, exists though, and so scientists, acknowledging the truth of assumption number 5 on page 313,
use the term ‘theory’ to describe their most certain findings.
ACTIVITY
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Create a chart for yourself like the one below. Fill in the second column with notes about which aspects
of the methods scientists use to make knowledge are related to each of the assumptions which underlie
science.
Methods and tools in natural science related to
Foundational assumption each assumption
The real world exists independently of our
perception of it
Humans are capable of accurate perception of
the real world
Natural processes are sufficient to account for
natural phenomena
Our perceptions may be biased or inaccurate
Scientific explanations are contingent
There is no one scientific method. The guiding principles and the general methods that we have looked at so far are
a framework which can be applied in a great many situations. However, what the method looks like differs greatly
from context to context. We do not have room in this book to explore many different contexts in detail, so we will
consider a few examples in order to give you an idea of the range of possibilities.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
How does the social context of scientific work affect the methods and findings of science?
Does the social context of the other areas of knowledge affect the methods and findings of those areas
of knowledge in similar ways? How so?
Observation means quite different things in different contexts. Biologists studying the behaviour of octopuses, for
example, have to get out into the ocean in areas of the world where the octopuses they wish to study live, such as
Indonesia, and then they have to actually follow the octopuses around in order to see what they do. Those
observations require the scientists to have access to boats and to be able to dive in order to get where the octopuses
are. Octopuses could, of course, be studied in captivity, but it would not be scientific to simply assume that the way
they behave in captivity is the same as the way they behave in the wild – maybe they do, but maybe they don’t.
Scientists could not make such a hypothesis until they had observations that could support it.
One particular kind of observation led teuthologists to hypothesize that octopuses are actually quite intelligent. Drs
Julian Finn and Mark Norman, marine biologists at Museum Victoria in Australia, observed an octopus in the
oceans of Indonesia using coconut shells as tools. You can use the QR code to see some of the footage that Dr Finn
shot of the octopus at work. This was the first time that any cephalopod had been observed using tools; previously, it
was thought that tool use required a large, complex brain. This extraordinary observation led to a new hypothesis
about the intelligence of octopuses.
We can see from these examples how important being able to observe the world is to the ability to create hypotheses
and to the ability to test them. What it is possible to hypothesize depends on the nature of what we have been able to
observe at any particular point. If an activity is truly scientific in nature, then new observations collected in aid of
trying to demonstrate the validity of a hypothesis – or to falsify it – generate more questions to be answered.
ACTIVITY
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Evidence
Evidence is one of the 12 key course concepts in TOK, and evidence plays an essential role in the
natural sciences. What counts as effective evidence, however, varies dramatically depending on the kind
of scientific work being done. We saw with the study of the Indonesian octopus that the evidence was a
video of the octopus using coconut shells as tools. If you watched the video, you saw that a particularly
important piece of evidence was the fact that the octopus took his coconut shell with him – he saved it
for future use. In the case of the search for the Higgs Boson, the evidence consists of the statistical
analysis of readouts of data collected from the energy release of particles colliding with each other.
Astronomers trying to work out what happened in the aftermath of the Big Bang need evidence that is
roughly 14 billion years old. It is possible to view really old light. Light takes a known amount of time to
travel from one place to the other – the definition of a light year is the time it takes light to travel in one
year. If astronomers want to see light that is nearly 14 billion years old, they need to work out where that
light would be now. As our capabilities of observing light in galaxies which are very far away from us,
and moving away, have improved, scientists have been able to observe very old light.
One piece of evidence in support of the Big Bang theory is that if it happened the way astronomers think
it did, then they should be able to find photons generated in the aftermath of the Big Bang, and those
photons have, in fact been found. Their existence is known as cosmic background radiation (Nagaraja).
Other problems with establishing precise details about the Big Bang have arisen, however, from
increasingly detailed observations that have been made by extremely advanced modern technology.
One proposal for an explanation which solves some of these problems is that immediately after the Big
Bang, a short burst of inflation occurred. If that did indeed happen, then such an event would have
caused primordial energy to be unevenly distributed in the Universe. Astronomers have been able to
make observations which support that explanation (Nagaraja). So far, then, astronomers have been able
to collect evidence which demonstrates that the Big Bang happened, and that there was an inflationary
event which occurred immediately afterward, expanding the size of the Universe dramatically.
There is still a problem, however: if this inflationary event happened, something must have powered it,
and so far, scientists have no evidence of what that might have been. To get the evidence, astronomers
have to be able to look at the Universe from a time before photons were visible, and we have no
technology which allows us to do that. So, our technology has allowed us to collect some of the evidence
that we need in order to understand the Big Bang, but we do not have all of the evidence we need in
order to explain the event in detail. Without that evidence, we cannot say that we have satisfactory
knowledge about the origins of the Universe. We have a partial, but incomplete, explanation.
Scientific explanations must be based in evidence; until scientists have evidence, they don’t make
claims. They offer hypotheses, and they keep looking.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
CONNECTION TO CORE THEME
Case study of an individual scientist
As a final example of the way in which the scientific method is shaped by the study being done, we will
take a look at a rather extraordinary experiment. As you read, consider how the work reflects the five
underlying assumptions that we have already discussed, and how the various steps in the scientific
method are tailored to this study.
In 2001, a professor of entomology (the study of insects) at the University of California, Dr Jerry A
Powell, published a ground-breaking paper which both illustrated the remarkable fact that a particular
species of moth can remain in diapause for 30 years and explained how diapause works (Powell 2001).
Hibernation is an overwintering mechanism which allows insects and other animals to synchronize their
periods of feeding to the time during which their food source is abundant (Lee). Diapause, on the other
hand, is a state of dormancy during which the physiological development of the insect ceases
(Denlinger).
Additionally, diapause is not merely an overwintering strategy, but rather can last for more than an entire
year. Prior to Powell’s study, diapause was known to last in some insects for as long as 12 years (de
Faria). When the study was originally undertaken, the intention was to observe diapause in a species of
moth, to see whether it worked the same way in this species as in other species.
Powell’s study involved the specific species of yucca moth, Prodoxus y-inversus. This moth has a
symbiotic relationship with a yucca plant, in that the moths lay their eggs in the flowers of the yucca,
ACTIVITY
Dr Powell’s articles about the yucca moth study went through peer review before they were published,
but, due to the extraordinarily long time that it took to run this experiment, it is extremely unlikely that this
study will ever be replicated.
1 Do you think that we can consider the knowledge he gained to be sound without that step?
2 Why or why not?
In this section, we have examined the beliefs which shape the way that scientific knowledge is made. We have
looked at the basic features of the scientific method and explored the fact that, while the overall shape of scientific
inquiry has shared features, regardless of the situation, the specific steps taken and tools used depend on the specific
work being done. In the final section of the chapter, we will consider how ethical considerations also help shape
scientific inquiry.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is the depiction of the ‘scientific method’ traditionally found in many school science textbooks an
accurate model of scientific activity?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Do scientists or the societies in which scientists operate exert a greater influence on what is ethically
acceptable in this area of knowledge?
In what ways have developments in science challenged long-held ethical values?
Learner profile
Principled
What, given the scope of the natural sciences, are the important principles for natural scientists to
adhere to?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
How do the ethical standards of each AOK shape the methods and tools of knowledge making?
Which AOKs have ethical principles which are similar to the natural sciences? Which are more different?
An example of this process can be found in the work of Julian Finn and Mark Norman on the octopuses in
Indonesia. On observing an octopus stacking and carrying coconut shells to use as shelters, the research team
hypothesized that this was an example of tool use – something not previously observed among invertebrates. As a
matter of ethical practice, Finn and his teammates identified and negated these explanations for the octopus,
behaviour: stimulus response (such as ants using leaves to carry food) and simple behaviour around an object that is
present all the time (such as a hermit crab using a discarded shell as protection) (Finn, et al). They identified as
evidence of actual tool use the facts that: the octopus had to manipulate the coconut shells in a particular way
(stacking them inside each other) in order to carry them, the carrying of the shells over considerable distances,
despite the fact that ‘This unique and previously undescribed form of locomotion is ungainly and clearly less
efficient than unencumbered locomotion (ie, costly in terms of energy and increased predator risk compared with
normal walking or the faster jet swimming escape’), and the fact that the shell is carried for future use – which the
researchers observed (Finn, et al). At no point do the researchers claim that their idea is unequivocally right; they
offered a hypothesis and they gathered evidence that supports it, as well as trying to determine whether alternative
explanations might make more sense given that evidence. To violate this process would be ethically wrong because
it would result in ‘knowledge’ which did not describe or explain what actually happens in the real world.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Should scientific research be subject to ethical constraints or is the pursuit of all scientific knowledge
intrinsically worthwhile?
The formulation and testing of hypotheses in the natural sciences, in other words, are bounded by the ethical
principle that actual truth exists and that the charge of the sciences is to discover and explain it, not to distort or
misrepresent it.
ACTIVITY
If you review the discussion of the other stages of the scientific method from the last section of this
chapter, you will begin to see that the same ethical principles which shape the making of hypotheses
apply to the other stages as well.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
How does the need to make accurate statements about the world outside of themselves shape the way
that scientists gather evidence, analyse evidence, test findings and use peer review and falsification?
CASE STUDY
Scientific malpractice
Use the QR code to read about Professor Marc Hauser who had to resign his position at Harvard
University after having been found to have engaged in research misconduct. Dr Hauser was in the
psychology department but was conducting biological studies on some monkeys in order to establish the
evolutionary development of certain mammalian traits. At the bottom of the article, you can read a
statement from Dr Hauser in response to the findings from an investigation by the Office of Research
Integrity (ORI), in the US Department of Health and Human Services. He suggests that people should
not feel that all of his work has been laid open to question because some of his studies were found to be
flawed (‘Marc Hauser’).
Based on the ethical conduct of science, do you think that if a scientist is found to have engaged in
misconduct, all of their work needs to be rechecked, or can we be confident that all earlier work has
resulted in accurate knowledge? How could we know that a scientist who has at some point begun to
engage in practices which call into question the legitimacy of the claims made as a result of the work has
never done so before?
ACTIVITY
Use the QR code to read the description of Samuel Morton’s experiment.
1 Did the experiment follow the scientific method?
2 If so, identify the different stages. If not, explain what was missing.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How was evidence misused in this particular experiment?
All of these arguments relied on interpretation of knowledge from religion and incomplete science, or
pseudoscience. There was no conclusive information to settle the question one way or the other; people were able to
choose the argument which served their purposes. In the early twenty-first century, however, when the actual
scientific project of mapping the human genome was completed, it demonstrated conclusively that there is no such
thing as race at the genetic level. Not only are all humans closely related to each other, but all humans are to some
degree African:
By analysing the genes of present-day Africans, researchers have concluded that the Khoe-San, who now
live in southern Africa, represent one of the oldest branches of the human family tree. The Pygmies of
central Africa also have a very long history as a distinct group. What this means is that the deepest splits in
the human family aren’t between what are usually thought of as different races – whites, say, or blacks or
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Asians or Native Americans. They’re between African populations such as the Khoe-San and the Pygmies,
who spent tens of thousands of years separated from one another even before humans left Africa. (Kolbert)
All non-Africans are descended from people who left Africa approximately 60 000 years ago. The map on the next
page shows the migration over time, and establishes the fact of the descendance to Europe and the Americas from
older humans from Asia and Africa.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do ethical principles shape the use of evidence in history and the arts in the same way that ethics shape
the use of evidence in the natural sciences?
The ethical use of science requires that we make our claims about the relationships among people from different
races based on the most up-to-date science which is available. It also requires, however, that we use science which
resulted from studies that were properly conducted. Speculation about relationships among species based on the
Bible or on skull measurements did not result in scientific claims. We always need to be alert to attempts to claim
that something is true based on science. Rather than just accepting the claim, we have to know how the ‘scientific
knowledge’ was developed. If it was done in accordance with scientific methods, then we know we can trust it.
A more recent accusation of an ethically questionable use of science was made in an article by the evolutionary
biologist Colin Wright titled ‘The New Evolution Deniers’. In his article, Wright argues that the age-old objections
to Darwin’s theory of evolution from right-wing evangelical Christians (as discussed in Chapter 6 and on page 309
of this chapter) have been usurped by a new form of denial from the political left, in the form of ‘blank-slate
psychology’. An old question in psychology is whether humans are born as blank slates or whether they are born
with certain traits innately present; this is known as the nature vs nurture debate. Some social justice activists,
Wright argues, are committed to the blank slate idea – the idea that human traits, including gender and sexual
identity – are the result of each person’s exposure to their environment. In other words, he says, some social justice
activists want to promote the idea that all brains – male and female – start out identical to each other and then
change as a result of socialization (Wright). This ‘blank-slate psychology’ is, however, rejected by scientists:
the evidence for innate sex-linked personality differences in humans is overwhelmingly strong. But
experts also universally reject that this view demands we embrace biological essentialism, because the
environment does play a role, and observed sex differences are simply averages and overlap tremendously
between the sexes. Sex no more determines one’s personality than it determines one’s height. Sex
certainly influences these traits, but it does not determine them. For instance, most of us know females
who are taller than most males, and males who are shorter than most females, though we are all aware that
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
males are, on average, taller than females. In humans, the same is true for behavioral traits. (Wright)
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Are findings of other areas of knowledge subject to controversy arising from political pressure in the
same way that some findings of the natural sciences are? Why or why not?
In other words, the human and natural sciences tell us that our traits are partly shaped by our biology and partly by
our environment. What is still unclear is the degree to which each one influences people.
Wright goes on to state that some activists have argued that biological sex is itself a social construct, the product of
environmental rather than biological factors. Traditionally speaking, humans have been considered sexually binary –
they are born with male sexual organs or they are born with female sexual organs. Gender identity, in contrast, is a
different proposition altogether. Gender identity is strongly shaped by environment, and biologists have made no
attempt to claim that physical biology determines a person’s gender identity. Wright suggests that social activists
have conflated gender and sex to make the case that all people – including transgender people – are the same, and,
therefore, deserve equal treatment under the law.
However, a closer look at some of the articles Wright is responding to suggests things might be a little more
complex. He refers to a number of articles and editorials from well-respected and ostensibly apolitical scientific
publications that argue that the traditional understanding of sex as a binary model is reductive and potentially
harmful to people born with hormonal, genetic or anatomical ambiguities that make it difficult to be classified
categorically as male or female. The most inclusive definitions suggest that as many as 1 in 100 people exhibit such
differences of sex development (DSD). ‘These discoveries do not sit well in a world in which sex is still defined in
binary terms’, writes Claire Ainsworth, a science journalist with a PhD in developmental biology. ‘Few legal
systems allow for any ambiguity in biological sex, and a person’s legal rights and social status can be heavily
influenced by whether their birth certificate says male or female’ (Ainsworth). This means that parents of babies
with DSD are often forced to make difficult decisions about whether to bring their child up as a boy or a girl, a
decision that might involve surgical intervention to ‘normalize’ their baby’s genitals, and which might clash with the
child’s ultimate gender identity.
The truth of the matter, Ainsworth concludes, is that there is no one way to categorically define sex. ‘So if the law
requires that a person is male or female’, she asks, ‘should that sex be assigned by anatomy, hormones, cells or
chromosomes, and what should be done if they clash?’
It is clear that this is a complex scientific issue, one made all the more difficult by the strong political and emotional
responses inevitably provoked by questions of gender identity. It is important to note, however, that whatever
conclusions we draw, there is no scientific justification for discriminating against transgender people or people with
DSD. The question, rather, is whether science provides a basis for suggesting that sex is not the binary dichotomy it
is commonly believed to be, and if so, what implications this has, if any, for the social and legal statuses of
transgender, non-binary and intersex individuals. This is, however, still a question, not a resolved finding. Given a
discussion which is so far new and unresolved, and which is, as we have seen, quite complex, any attempt to make
dogmatic claims that science supports one particular political perspective on this question is a misuse of science, in
the same way that science has been misused to support the anti-vaxxer movement or to deny humans’ role in
accelerating global warming.
ACTIVITY
Read the article by Colin Wright and those he is responding to using the QR codes. Think about the
following questions:
1 How do we decide between the competing claims of qualified scientists?
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
2 What evidence does each author provide for their claims? Is the evidence sourced to scientific
studies?
3 What are the strengths and weaknesses of each article?
4 Which author, in your opinion, is using scientific thinking in a more ethical way?
ACTIVITY
1 What do you think the forces are which work on people’s minds in such a way as to cause them to
prioritize something above reality? In other words, what kinds of things happen in people’s experience
to drive them to care more about what they want to be true than what is true?
2 In many cases, wanting something to be true can be a positive force, in that if the goal is achievable,
that desire can drive us to action. In other cases, however, goals are not achievable, but people try to
realize them anyway. How can people know whether what they want is reasonable and achievable
and when it is not?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do the values that influence the production of knowledge in the natural sciences compare to the
important values in mathematics?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Values
We saw in Chapter 7 how deeply intertwined political knowledge and values are. We have seen in this
chapter how deeply dependent the acquisition of scientific knowledge by non-scientists can be on other
personal values, which may either aid or impede the acceptance of that knowledge. The methods for
making knowledge in the natural sciences reveal that scientists in general value careful observation,
rational processing of data and caution in making claims, even when they are well-founded, because
some finding later might arise to alter those claims. Perhaps more than anything else, that caution
reflects the values of those who generate scientific knowledge: scientists value the idea that their
findings express the truth about the way the world works, as much as it is possible to achieve that goal.
This is why theories are called theories and not facts, even though they are well-founded, and this is why
the search for knowledge in all scientific arenas continues. Scientific knowledge is never ‘finished’. New
technologies, new findings in other fields and new ways of thinking about things can, at any moment,
cause scientists to revise or refine their knowledge.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do the natural sciences provide us with good examples of people who approach knowledge in a rigorous
and responsible way?
The scientific truths that we have established are good enough to allow for prediction, invention and control over
many aspects of our lives. These include technological development, medical advancements and increased
understanding of how to preserve this world for future generations, as well as to explore the possibility of other
worlds which might be developed should that one day become desirable. The truth of scientific claims must be
established rationally through observation and logical induction, and it is tested pragmatically, by the fact that the
claims work when we endeavour to use them in order to improve people’s lives.
In Chapter 8, we were introduced to the physicist Richard Feynman, who provided some insights into the nature of
mathematics by way of the contrast of mathematics and science. As a physicist, of course, Feynman used
mathematics as a tool to help him do science. As a scientist, he expressed the central ethic of the natural sciences in
a very simple statement: ‘If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong’. In that simple statement is the key to science:
‘It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are who made the
guess, or what his name is … If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it’ (Feynman).
This simple, elegant statement sums up the relationship between science and truth very beautifully. The guiding
principle of scientists requires them to determine what is rather than what they wish or imagine or hope things to be.
It doesn’t make any difference how beautiful your guess is, it doesn’t matter how smart you are who made the guess, or what his
name is … If it disagrees with experiment, it’s wrong. That’s all there is to it.
Richard Feynman
Learner profile
Reflective
Can we ever be completely objective in our study of ourselves?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do some AOKs have more ‘predictive power’ than others? How does this relate to the respective scopes
of those AOKs?
In 2008, the global economic markets fell into a deep recession. This happens from time to time, but the severity of
this recession was so great that people immediately wondered how this wasn’t predicted, particularly when an entire
academic discipline was devoted to using the methods of science (including observation, hypothesis, application of
theory and prediction) to describe exactly this sort of phenomenon. Economics is generally considered a ‘science’,
albeit a ‘human science’, but if the natural sciences are able to apply the level of predictive power needed to send a
rocket into deep space and find its target, why can’t economists identify and defend against recessions?
One answer to this is that the human sciences are simply not capable of the level of prediction offered by the natural
sciences. While we might be able to manage rockets in space, managing the economy is beyond us. The difference?
It is the ‘human’ element. Humans are just not very predictable. We are not very reliable when it comes to
consistency and trying to guess what others will do when faced with a choice is nearly impossible. Human scientists,
however, still give it a shot. They do this largely because of the success of the scientific method; its application has
given us huge amounts of knowledge and control over our environment. But it is precisely the use of the scientific
method, particularly in its use of mathematical modelling (very useful in astrophysics), on human individuals and
institutions that some suggest as the reason why many didn’t see the recession coming. The precision and
unassailable logic of the mathematical models used to describe the world’s economy provided the illusion of control
(Knowledge@Wharton). However, the economy cannot be controlled in the same way that rockets can. Rockets can
be controlled because the underlying forces of physics are not making choices, they just do what they do. People are
not forces – they make choices – and we cannot really predict what those choices will be.
What use, then, is the scientific method when applied to human beings? This chapter explores the ways in which
elements of the scientific method are applied in the human sciences and provides opportunities to reflect on that
application, the quality of the outcomes, the values inherent in such an application and the particular care needed for
the subjects of that application, human beings.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is it possible to discover laws of human behaviour in the same way that the natural sciences discover
laws of nature?
ACTIVITY
1 Create a grid like the one below. Fill it in with your initial thoughts about these two different AOKs.
The natural sciences The human sciences
Some disciplines included in this AOK are …
What does the AOK study?
What problems are solved by this AOK?
Are there any assumptions inherent in the AOK?
What are the weaknesses of the AOK?
How effective is the scientific method in this AOK?
2 Complete the table individually then compare your responses with a partner. How are your initial
views similar and different? How have your ideas changed in relation to your partner’s?
So, what is the difference between the ‘natural’ and the ‘human’ sciences? We should probably start with the
obvious difference: each science focuses on a different object (what is investigated). As we’ve seen, the natural
sciences has as its object of study natural features of the world like bushes, rocks, atoms and stars, whereas the
human sciences study human beings. This is pretty obvious stuff.
But are humans not part of the natural world? Biology, physics and chemistry have all been used very effectively in
the study of human beings. Obvious examples might include how biologists have explained how our genes are
passed from generation to generation, or how chemists have developed healthy foods and medicines, while
physicists have worked wonders in understanding why we get sunburned and in developing X-rays and MRI
machines to see inside the human body to help treat illness.
In these examples, however, the elements being explored by these natural sciences have precious little to do with
what makes human beings human. They each treat humans as if they were objects and explain an aspect of the
physical body. Genes, chemical interactions and the effects of ultraviolet radiation on human skin are all the sorts of
things that don’t require any mention of human thoughts, beliefs or psychology. There are other questions about
humans, however, that require more than descriptions of physical interactions and processes. While biology might
be able to explain the mechanisms involved with inheritance, we still might ask whether our genes dictate our
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
behaviour or our personalities. While chemistry can tell us what is in our food and (along with biology) what will be
healthy for us, we still might wonder why we eat so many things that we know are bad for us. While physics might
explain why our skin burns in sunlight, this nevertheless doesn’t really answer questions about why some people
might put themselves at risk of skin cancer by over-tanning. These further questions require an explanation that
relates to concepts describing human behaviour and beliefs.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How significant are the differences between disciplines within the human sciences?
For example, in the human science of geography (we will explore the different types of human science shortly), we
might be interested in the movement of people during different stages of a large city’s growth over time. Simply
pointing out that the city has grown or that it has grown in this or that direction is only half the story. A human
geographer would also need to appeal to why people moved as they have. Concepts like ‘economic opportunity’,
‘incorporate’, ‘smart growth’, ‘city planning’ or ‘housing markets’ all draw on the beliefs, desires and expectations
of individuals – concepts irrelevant when describing ‘natural’ geography (in most cases).
One difference, then, is that human sciences take as their object of study the relationship between human action and
human belief. Human scientists need to know facts about human bodies and their interaction with physical features
of the environment, but their questions are primarily about humans as agents, things which have beliefs, consider
choices, make decisions and engage in goal-oriented behaviour.
The human sciences, then, are focused on ‘agents’, that is, we act in relation to reasons and beliefs and the various
human sciences attempt to investigate that relationship.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Explanation
Various areas of knowledge provide different types of explanations. Here we are outlining a difference in
the types of concepts and ideas which would be appropriate in the natural sciences and the human
sciences. If we were to suggest that layers of sediment at the bottom of a river wanted to become rock in
100 million years to describe the process of rock formation, we would be accused of offering a poor
explanation because the concept of desire plays no role in the natural science of geology. The ‘reasons’
provided by the natural sciences refer to impersonal natural forces that act in the world. However, not
including the concept of ‘desire’ in the explanation of why different people spend their money on different
types of goods and services would equally be a poor explanation because ‘desire’ is a fundamental
concept in economics. Any ‘reason’ for an economic downturn, or some particular distribution of
resources would incorporate at some level the thoughts or beliefs of human beings.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What are the differences between the use of the concept of ‘cause’ in the human sciences and the
natural sciences?
Another difference between the human and the natural sciences is a direct consequence of the assumption that
human belief is the root of human behaviour. If beliefs are part of the explanation of human behaviour, and if
science is about recording observable phenomena, then how might the human scientist gather data about these
beliefs?
While we might be familiar with our own beliefs and have some awareness of how they relate to our behaviour, we
wouldn’t be able to observe another individual’s beliefs directly. We might infer their beliefs from how they behave,
but we do not have direct access to their own motives, beliefs or desires. Were we to observe a woman giving up
one job and moving to another city for another, more highly paid job, we might infer all sorts of beliefs: she wanted
to earn more money; she prioritized the new job more than her desire to live in the old city; she expected that she
would be happy in a new city. However, we can only speculate about those beliefs, we could not directly observe
them.
The human scientist would need to find direct evidence of which belief actually explained the behaviour. The
traditional way of doing this is through interviewing the subject or asking the subject. The answers to these
questions can then form part of the human scientist’s evidence.
The human scientists, then, will certainly use observation, like natural scientists, but in many cases human scientists
must gather a different sort of evidence, based on the testimony of the humans being studied. Once gathered, this
evidence can be said to be ‘observed’ in the sense that a human scientist might be able to evaluate and analyse this
information. This sort of data, however, raises questions of reliability due to its qualitative nature. We will explore
the nature of this sort of evidence and its effect on the reliability of knowledge claims in the Methods and tools
section of this chapter.
TOK trap
Speculation about other people’s beliefs or motives is not a reliable way to evidence claims about
behaviour. While we might think that some person acted for various reasons, and it might be plausible to
make this inference (as in the example of the woman moving cities above) the best evidence, the type of
evidence which supersedes the rest, is to have direct evidence of that belief in the form of the woman’s
own explanation or testimony. Therefore, in the context of TOK, to merely speculate about others’ beliefs
is to identify plausible claims about people, not reliably evidenced claims. Since TOK is partly about
learning how to identify more and less reliable claims, offering unreliable claims in TOK as part of your
analysis is not a good strategy.
So far, we’ve suggested that human scientists take as their object things (humans with beliefs, motives, goals, etc)
that are importantly different from objects in the natural world and must therefore use different methods to identify
and observe relevant evidence. These points help us make sense of the ‘human’ part of the human sciences, but what
about the ‘science’ part? What does it suggest that we call them the human sciences?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How would you characterize the relationships between the Scopes and the Methods and tools of other
AOKs?
This suggestion that the human sciences assume a difference between human behaviour and the events we observe
in the natural world, however, raises a challenging question. The difference rests on the assumption that we have
reasons and beliefs and that these are part of the explanation of why we act the way we do. The question is to what
extent those beliefs determine what we do. Given what we have learned about the ‘scientific method’, one might say
that the ‘human sciences’ attempt to apply the scientific method to understanding the relationship between human
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do we decide whether a particular discipline should be regarded as a human science?
This incomplete list includes some of the disciplines which are traditionally considered as human sciences, but there
are others, such as philosophy, critical theory, literary criticism, linguistics, art history and law. These aim to
systematically study various other aspects of human behaviour, but they have a weaker connection to the scientific
method. Each of the different human sciences has as its focus a different aspect, but they all relate directly to human
behaviour.
One way of exploring the differences between all these disciplines and AOKs is to highlight the reductive nature of
science. It is traditional to offer a scientific explanation by pointing out the interactions between the most
fundamental elements of the system. Chemistry explores this by looking at the elements of the Periodic Table.
Physics is concerned with fundamental forces. Biology uses concepts like proteins, genes, cells and organisms as
building blocks in its explanations. The human sciences also aim to reduce complex phenomena to their smallest
features. Economics uses concepts like price, demand, supply and value. The fundamental features of human
psychology vary depending on the perspective taken: some might say Freud’s Id, Ego and Superego are the starting
points, while others might see neuro-physical features of the brain or its various cognitive functions (like attention or
memory), or language, intelligence or emotion as the fundamental concepts. Even Plato back in the fourth century
thought the human soul or psyche was constituted by reason, passion and desire, and behaviour could be explained
by the interplay between them.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do natural scientists use perspectives in similar ways to human scientists, or in different ways? What is
the significance of any differences for understanding the scope of those AOKs?
In this chapter we will be primarily focusing on two of the human sciences, psychology and economics. They serve
as good examples of the central issues in the human sciences and the questions and issues discussed in relation to
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
them can be applied with relevant changes to the others.
One key feature of these different approaches is that they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. You can be a
behaviourist and your friend can be an evolutionary psychologist and you both might offer viable explanations of
some behaviour. The charitable reading is that human cognition and behaviour are incredibly complex things and no
one approach can capture all the nuances. A less charitable view might suggest that the choice of a perspective is
little more than a matter of taste: it is interesting, for instance, to think about Jung’s archetypes in terms of human
storytelling (the similarities between various myths across cultures, or the power of these myths to illustrate the
features of common human experience), but having an interesting perspective is different from having a
scientifically valid perspective.
ACTIVITY
For each of the different perspectives in Table 10.2, consider the following questions (it might help to
keep thinking of each as a type of ‘map’).
1 What are the fundamental concepts and ideas that are applied in these approaches? Where do these
concepts come from? Are they borrowed from other disciplines?
2 What are the fundamental (most basic) facts of this view upon which other facts can be built?
3 Where do you see overlap in terms of the concepts and facts being used by the different
perspectives?
4 In what ways do you think the perspectives guide the thought processes of the researcher? What
questions will they ask? What types of answers will they provide?
5 What are the limits of these perspectives? Are there types of behaviours that they might not be well
suited to answer?
6 How grounded in observable fact do you think these approaches are? Can you rank them according
to how much their conclusions or explanations can be evidenced through observable events?
7 How would you rate these perspectives in terms of their being more or less suited to the job of
explaining human cognition or behaviour?
One way of offering some criteria about which perspectives are valid is to consider the links between the
perspectives and scientific research. The Freudian psychodynamic perspective for instance, postulates the existence
of some feature of our minds called the ‘Id’ (rhymes with ‘lid’), which is meant to be the seat of our biological urges
like the sex drive or the seat of aggression. Some would argue that treating these ‘urges’ as if they belonged to a
distinguishable feature is to add too much to a theory of human cognition. Instead, it would be simpler to explore
other explanations that didn’t require the existence of this unobserved and unobservable aspect beyond the
behaviour itself. As our understanding of the human brain progresses, or our understanding of human society and its
effects on individuals progresses, some of these perspectives might be able to better draw on them and incorporate
them into their explanations.
What is the economy and how does it work? The term ‘the economy’ refers to all the decisions we make about
producing, consuming and allocating the goods and services that drive the world around us. On every day, in every
country on the planet, people are buying and selling, trading, creating, donating, making and using things they have
bought or sold. All these decisions and actions together are called ‘the economy.’ Both at the small scale of
individuals and larger scale of entire industries or countries, there are times when things are going well (when
people have good jobs, earning good wages) and times when things don’t go so well, and there is a lot of swinging
back and forth between these two situations, like a pendulum. These swings can be quite damaging to individuals,
companies and countries, so learning how they work is the job of the economist.
Trying to develop descriptions, explanations and predictions of these phenomena is incredibly challenging but the
human sciences have nevertheless made an attempt. The primary difficulty in this discipline is the same problem we
have seen elsewhere in the human sciences: it often is impossible to know precisely what an individual is thinking
when acting a certain way (even asking them might not lead to a truthful answer), and predicting a person’s
behaviour is equally challenging.
As with any of the other maps we apply to the world, choices get made over just what sorts of things should be
included in our descriptions and how to handle them. These various approaches, or perspectives, each has its own set
of values, priorities and assumptions.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Are predictions in the human sciences inevitably unreliable?
Is human behaviour too unpredictable to study scientifically?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do other AOKs have a ‘macro’ and a ‘micro’ element like economics does?
Just how the micro level relates to the macro level, however, is a challenge. Economists suggest that the
macroeconomy is the aggregate of the micro-level choices of individuals, meaning that the macro-behaviour (what
happens at the macro level) is the sum total of all the micro-level choices. However, developing a more ‘law-like’
relationship is a genuine challenge: just think of the difference in describing how your friends, behave individually
with how a whole crowd of people would behave. While describing your friends’ behaviour might be relatively
easy, describing how a stadium full of people will behave is far more difficult. It is not a question of just adding up
the choices.
The TOK point here, then, is twofold: how reliable are those descriptions at the micro level and do all those
individual choices ‘add up’ to anything at the macro level that you can then measure or describe reliably? ‘The
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
economy’ at the macro level isn’t a thing or an object we can study. To even identify what we mean by ‘the
economy’ we must make decisions about what sorts of data we are going to use in the discussion. Do we use
information about how many people are at work? What sort of work: full-time? Part-time? Permanent contracts or
limited term contracts? Do we try to include undocumented workers? Maybe we measure the amount of capital or
the amount of debt? Like real maps, economists must decide what is going to feature in their descriptions and what
will be prioritized. These choices will affect the descriptions offered.
We’ll explore some fundamental assumptions in economic theory which are highly questionable after the next
section.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Are all AOKs (or disciplines) affected by world events in the same way that economics might be?
In 1936, Keynes published The General Theory of Employment, Interest, and Money which advocated for a stronger
role of the government in the economy. Rather than letting the economy alone, governments should, in times of
trouble, increase its spending to make it easier for the consumers of society to spend money. Rather than the
neoclassical’s emphasis on producers supplying goods to the economy, Keynes argued that a healthy economy is
driven by demand (the consumers) and recessions happen when people are unable to purchase desired goods, no
matter how many of them are available.
These clashing positions in what constitutes the fundamental forces driving an economy have been called
‘paradigms’, meaning each draws on a different set of beliefs about how the economy works. They are not a true
scientific paradigm, however, because the two can co-exist: there is nothing in the economy being described which
decisively shows the other to be false. As we saw in Chapter 9, in scientific paradigms the evidence will ultimately
confirm one theory over the other and one cannot hold the earlier view unless one ignores the evidence.
ACTIVITY
1 Use the QR codes to read two articles about neoclassical economics and see if it is possible to
identify political, social or moral beliefs (ie, beyond simply economic beliefs) that you think might be
impacting the descriptions of the economic principles. Consider in what ways an individual’s pre-
existing political beliefs might impact the choice and application of ethical theory.
2 Do you think that economic theories and political theories can be separated?
3 In what ways do their scopes overlap?
4 Do all AOKs have overlapping scopes like this?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do paradigm shifts function differently in the natural sciences? What does this suggest about the
nature of the AOKs?
In the human sciences, however, it is not at all clear that we progress in the same way. The concept of ‘paradigm
shift’ still exists in the human sciences, but the final stage of a shift, where the old theory is seen as no longer
appropriate, is not as clearly achieved.
Rather than the knowledge developing via paradigm shifts, where new theories are developed to account for
weaknesses in old theories, new perspectives in the human sciences are developed which interpret the data in
different ways. The different theories lack incommensurability, in that old theories might still be used alongside
new ones. There is nothing in the data gained from observation of the world that will show one to be decidedly false
and the other true: both old and new can co-exist. If this is true, however, then it is difficult to think of the human
sciences as progressing in significant ways like we might suggest the natural sciences have. This suggests that
human science is not cumulative, but interpretive; the different perspectives in human psychology, for instance, are
simply different ways of seeing things as opposed to theories that once were accepted but which have now been
shown to be false.
Paradigm shifts in the natural sciences result in new theories that are incommensurable with old theories: one cannot
believe Aristotle’s theory of the essential elements and believe in the theory which has identified the basic elements
of chemistry and the ways they interact as described by modern physics. It is not a matter of interpretation – the first
theory has been shown to be wrong or false.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
In what ways might we say that our knowledge improves over time? Would your answer differ in relation
to different AOKs?
In economics, for instance, we might take a ‘functionalist perspective’ and view the economy in terms of its ability
to maximize output and reward. The goal in this case is to provide participants in that economy the best
opportunities to make the most of their resources and their opportunities. We might, however, interpret the economy
as a system in which conflict is the main dynamic, where participants are attempting to (or should be left alone to)
maximize their or their own economic class’ opportunity and access to resources at the expense of others. This is
often a charge of Marxist critics against a capitalist perspective; that an economy is somehow unhealthy or unfair
when the society’s wealth is concentrated in the hands of an elite at the expense of those who are suffering as a
result of that inequality. In that case the privileged will always have an unfair advantage in the economic conflict
(Matresse and Lumen Learning).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
In what ways does the perspective of the knowledge producer influence the knowledge produced in
other AOKs? Are the human sciences especially affected by the perspectives of their experts?
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
The idea here is that these are interpretations of just what ‘the economy’ is and how it works. No matter our
perspective, we will be able to identify examples of economic activity which seems to confirm our perspective, but
the other perspective will equally be able to interpret the data in relation to their own perspective. This suggests that
the data cannot decisively show one theory mistaken and the other true. We cannot do this with Aristotelian physics;
his paradigm has no bearing on any modern observations of the world.
On this view, then, prediction is not genuinely possible because any outcome will be interpreted in whatever way the
theory suggests it should be, and this interpretation will come after the fact. The world might not behave the way
that some theory suggests it should, but the theory will be applied to interpret the event in a way that makes sense, as
opposed to showing that the theory is false.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do AOKs other than the human sciences have normative claims? How do other AOKs manage the
influence of normative values?
However, the human sciences also make other sorts of claims about what needs to be done in the face of these facts.
These other types of claims are called ‘normative’ claims. They provide guidance for our behaviour and often are
rooted in values rather than facts. If the rate of unemployment is high, and getting higher (a positive claim), a
Keynesian economist might suggest that the government needs to intervene in the economy to stop this, while a
neoclassicist economist might suggest that nothing needs to be done by the government, that the problems facing the
economy will eventually right themselves (both normative claims). The human geographers might agree that
affluent people are moving back into poorer neighbourhoods in a city, which is pushing up the rents in those
neighbourhoods. Some might see this as a problem in that the people living in those neighbourhoods are no longer
able to afford the rising rents, but others might see this as a process of ‘urban renewal’.
We see, then, that the scope of the human sciences (in their attempt to both describe and predict human behaviour)
drives experts in those fields to move beyond the facts and provide explanations and interpretations of the facts in a
way that often leads to quite different positions. These normative claims are not likely to be decided upon through
appeal to the facts, since they are interpretations of those facts and are grounded in values and judgment that often
come from outside the field (like the political beliefs affecting the choice of economic theory). Any attempt to
develop a policy out of a series of facts requires an economist to develop a claim about what is right or what should
be done in some situation. On one hand, this shows that ethical beliefs (beliefs about what actions are ‘good’ or
‘right’) are deeply part of economics, but on the other hand, it should make you wonder about just where those
ethical beliefs come from and how they can be justified.
Sometimes the normative statements are treated as if they are simple facts. Consider the dilemma when a low-
income neighbourhood encounters an influx of wealthier landowners or renters. With them comes more money,
which then results in a more affluent area, more shops, restaurants and perhaps city infrastructure. Some would
argue that this is obviously a good thing; it is a fact that rising rents and property values are a good thing, at least
from the perspective of the landlords and homeowners. However, if the incomes of the people who have lived in that
neighbourhood don’t rise along with the property values, then they might be forced to leave because the rents and
the prices of the goods for sale in that neighbourhood might rise. This might result in a loss of culture and more
difficulties making ends meet for those forced to move. So, while ‘property prices are low’ is a positive claim,
‘urban renewal is an important part of a successful city’ is not entirely obvious. After all, who defines what a
‘successful city’ looks like?
ACTIVITY
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Is it possible to eliminate the effect of the observer in the pursuit of knowledge in the human sciences?
How might the beliefs and interests of human scientists influence their conclusions?
In this section we will largely be focusing on psychology as an example of human sciences, because it has a large
number of what we would consider scientific experiments which attempt to make human thoughts, values and
beliefs observable. For example, we know that we are sometimes biased in our dealings with other people, often
unconsciously, but the fact that they are unconscious makes it difficult for us to identify our biases and deal with
them.
CASE STUDY
Project Implicit
In an attempt to measure what psychologists call ‘implicit social cognition’, that is ‘thoughts and feelings
outside of conscious awareness and control’, three social scientists formed Project Implicit. It was
designed to identify an individual’s non-conscious attitudes and biases towards a number of different
characteristics, which has grown to include race, religion, favourite US presidents, weapons and body
weight.
One test explores the extent to which concepts like male and female are associated with other concepts
like career and family. Since the focus of the test is to uncover non-conscious beliefs, simply asking ‘are
you more likely to associate “male” with “career”?’ will, of course, not work. One reason for this is social
expectation: when asked sensitive questions about bias or prejudice we might not want to give genuine
answers, instead opting for what social pressure suggests we should say. In this case, presumably, we
would want not to be seen to consider ‘male’ and ‘career’ to be associated as this is a gender stereotype
which modern society is keen to overturn. Knowing this, Project Implicit instead asks participants to play
a word categorization game, where we are asked to classify terms under headings like ‘Family’ and
‘Career’. The terms are men’s and women’s names (like Ben, Julia, John, Rebecca) and terms related to
the workplace (like ‘employment’, ‘work’ and ‘salary’). Participants are asked to classify them to either
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Male/Female or Family/Work as quickly as possible. The time it takes to classify each term becomes the
observable data and the assumption is that people will find it easier and quicker to categorize terms in
line with their non-conscious biases. The time it takes to categorize the pairings is measured and the
quicker times are indicative of your biases.
Interpreting the reliability of this test is problematic. Taking this test at different times, in different
conditions, tends to yield different results. This suggests that the phenomenon being studied might not
be as observable as assumed. In fact, the test designers are aware of this and suggest that the data
provided in the test is valuable ‘in the aggregate’; that is, using the results attained by a large sample of
many people might tell us about a population, but might have little relevance if applied to individuals
(Lopez). They also suggest that the data should be used carefully in making decisions based on it in
reality (Project Implicit ‘Understanding and interpreting IAT results’). Just because you take it once, that
doesn’t mean that the results from that one test describe you well. You would have to take the test many
times, in different situations (in different physical contexts and at different times), in order to identify a
general trend about yourself.
This is one example of how human scientists have discovered clever ways of ‘making observable’ what
is going on in the minds of participants, even though those beliefs themselves are unobservable,
sometimes even to the participants themselves. We’ve seen in this case, however, that the results of
these experiments might not be reliable, or they are only reliable in certain situations and conditions.
ACTIVITY
Use the QR code to find out more about Project Implicit and take the test.
1 What do you think the point of a test like this is?
2 Are there values written into this test?
3 How might the results of a test like this impact our future behaviour?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How does new knowledge in other AOKs affect individual ethical values?
DEEPER THINKING
The Hawthorne Effect
This discussion of Project Implicit raises a challenge to the usefulness of some forms of data gathering
in the human sciences, called the Hawthorne Effect (or the Observer Effect). The general idea is that
people behave differently when they know they are being observed (or tested). In the 1920s and 1930s,
a series of experiments took place in a factory in Hawthorne (a city in the US) to see whether or not
lighting levels would have an effect on the productivity of workers in the factory. Researchers found,
however, that continually decreasing the light actually correlated with an increase in production. Could it
be that the darker it was the more effective the factory workers were? This seemed implausible. The final
conclusion was that the workers were not responding to the light at all, but rather were responding to the
fact that they were being observed and so worked harder, wanting to ‘do well’ (Kenton 2019a). You
might have experienced this if your school has ever been inspected by some outside body or your class
has been inspected by the principal or head teacher. You might have noticed that the lessons offered
while the teacher is being observed are significantly different than the day-to-day lessons and the
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What is the relationship between ‘replicability’ and ‘reliability’ in the scientific method? What are the
differences between how the human and natural sciences apply that method?
This is why in 2013, researchers at the University of Virginia, led by psychologist Brian Nosek, established the
Center for Open Science, whose aims state that ‘the challenges of disease, poverty, education, social justice, and the
environment are too urgent to waste time on studies lacking rigor, outcomes that are never shared, and results that
are not reproducible’ (‘Show Your Work’). The emphasis on reproducibility shows the importance of this for rigour
in the sciences. Unfortunately, the Center found that of 100 replication attempts of a wide range of psychological
studies only 39 of them were able to reproduce results similar to those of the original studies (Baker). Since 2013,
the Center has worked to raise the profile of reproducibility as a crucial step in the processes by which the sciences
make their claims more reliable. They produced a pamphlet highlighting reasons why reproducibility is necessary to
avoid a ‘crisis’ in the sciences (Figueiredo and Janz). In this case the focus is on research in the political sciences.
ACTIVITY
Use the QR code to research the seven reasons why replicability is important for robust scientific
knowledge.
1 For each reason, explain why replication in that instance will help make the research stronger.
2 What do you think are the reasons why replication is such an important feature of the construction of
knowledge in the human sciences?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
In what ways do the human and natural sciences manage the challenges posed by qualitative data?
Do other AOKs use quantitative data as much as the human sciences? How might the historical method,
for instance, manage or use quantitative data?
In the human sciences, the investigations often require researchers to seek data that is subjective to the individual
(like pain) and this sort of data is a challenge to measure with any reliability. The effectiveness of a school initiative
on student well-being could measure some quantifiable data by measuring things like the numbers of students
visiting the school psychologist, the number of days missed or the number of students on the ‘vulnerable’ lists. At
some point, however, the data will have to include information gathered from the students themselves about how
they feel. This sort of data, which relies on an individual’s introspection or self-reporting internal states is called
‘qualitative’.
As an example, the World Health Organization studies the well-being of young people all over the world and relies
heavily on qualitative data in doing so. Rather than letting students make up their own responses, a series of possible
answers are offered. Use the QR code to see the full results and analysis of one such study.
Some of the questions they asked are shown in Table 10.3, together with the types of responses the participants
could choose from (Currie, et al).
Table 10.3 World Health Organization questions to determine health and well-being among young people
Types of questions Responses offered
How often they experienced a number of unpleasant A range from ‘about every day’ to ‘rarely or
symptoms in the last six months (eg, headache, never’
stomachache, feeling low, irritable or bad tempered, feeling
nervous, difficulties in getting to sleep, feeling dizzy)
How they would rate their ‘life satisfaction’ A ‘Cantril Scale’, where the top of the scale
represents the best possible (for the
individual) and the bottom represents the
worst possible (for the individual)
How they would describe the state of their health A scale offering ‘excellent’, ‘good’, ‘fair’ and
‘poor’ as answers
Whether they find ‘most of the students in my class(es) are A range of options ranging from ‘strongly
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
kind and helpful’ agree’ to ‘strongly disagree’
How pressured they feel by the schoolwork they have to do Response options ranging from ‘a lot’ to
‘not at all’
How they perceive their teachers’ beliefs about their school Response options ranged from ‘very good’
performance compared to their classmates to ‘below average’
How many close friends of the same gender they have Response options ranging from ‘none’ to
‘three or more’
How easy they found it to talk to their parents, ‘about things Response options ranging from ‘very easy’
that really bother you’ to ‘very difficult’
How often they had taken part in the bullying of another Response options ranging from ‘I have not
student at school recently bullied another student at school in the
past couple of months’ to ‘several times a
week’
ACTIVITY
1 Consider the questions and types of responses shown in Table 10.3. Identify elements that you think
would refer to observable facts or facts which could be measured objectively (quantitative) and
elements which are known only to the participant (qualitative).
2 Make a list of the evidence a participant would need to use to justify their response. Is that evidence
valid?
3 To what extent do you think that these questions will lead to genuine data?
4 Do you think the types of questions and the available responses might limit the objectivity of the data?
5 Might there be contextual elements that would influence the responses? What if a young person took
the test after a fight with their parents? Or at a time when they were feeling particularly lonely?
6 Do you think those questions would capture genuine facts about the individual?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do other AOKs suffer the challenges posed by non-neutral questions to the same extent? What
differences in the scope and methods and tools of the AOKs can you use to explain your answer?
The questions above all rely on ‘self-reporting’, meaning that the students were asked questions that required them
to disclose information about themselves and there are some very subjective elements to them. Consider the question
about what they think their teachers think about them. This question is ripe for subjectivity. What if the question was
being answered after a particularly bad day at school when the student received a poor grade from a teacher? The
student is very likely in that case to think that the teacher doesn’t think they are as good as other students, but this
might simply not be true. Similarly, the question about talking to a parent about ‘things that really bother you’ would
surely depend on just what the student is bothered by: some things they might talk to their mother about, but some
other things they would not.
The last question in Table 10.3 also raises an interesting challenge for human scientists gathering qualitative data.
That question asks about whether the student considers themselves to be a ‘bully’. A bully is generally not
something a student wants to be thought of as being, so asking whether someone is a bully might make them want to
answer ‘no’, regardless of whether they are or not.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does non-neutral language affect knowledge constructed in other AOKs as much as it might in the
human sciences?
Learner profile
Communicators
How does the way we ask questions affect the responses we get?
This is an extreme example, but consider the following: ‘In what ways have you been discriminated against because
of your race?’ This question is clearly assuming that you have been discriminated against, and, if you cannot think
of a time when you’ve been discriminated against, it makes it difficult to answer. Consider, ‘How important is the
support of your parents in your academic studies?’ This seems neutral because you might say ‘not at all’, but the
assumption is that parental support is the sort of thing that should be an important part of your academic studies.
In a real-life example, a recent survey in New Zealand gathered data about people’s attitudes towards a law which
prohibits smacking or spanking their children. Voters were asked, ‘Should a smack as part of good parental
correction be a criminal offense in New Zealand’ and received a ‘no’ response in an overwhelming majority of
responses (87.6 per cent responded with ‘no’). There were criticisms of this vote however, given that the survey was
conducted by a group explicitly aimed at overturning the law, suggesting that the motives behind the survey were
negatively influencing the collection of the data. The complaint focused on the wording of the question; the
suggestion was that elements of the question would have unfairly swayed the respondents towards a ‘no’ response.
ACTIVITY
Consider the following questions and explain whether you think elements of each might be worded in a
non-neutral or leading way. For those that you think are leading the respondent, can you formulate a
more neutral question that still genuinely captures the same sort of data? Don’t get caught up in a
discussion around what the answer should be, rather you are investigating whether the question’s
wording leads you towards a particular answer or shapes how you think about the issues.
1 Are you enjoying school?
2 Do you have any problems with any of your teachers?
ACTIVITY
Use the QR codes to carry out some research on how to avoid leading questions and how you can
promote neutral questions. You might find that you think that some of the advice given is still leading or
non-neutral, but that’s fine – it just means that you’re applying your knowledge!
ACTIVITY
Construct a survey for an end-of-year TOK feedback survey
At the end of many courses in school, teachers ask the students to fill in a survey about their learning
experiences in a particular class. This is valuable qualitative data which could help your teacher and
your school develop a better TOK Programme.
1 Undertake some research about the learning experiences of those on the TOK Programme. Construct
a feedback survey, using the knowledge you’ve developed from your research, and give it to the TOK
students leaving the programme.
2 Write an evaluation of your questionnaire and the data collected. Did you collect the right data (and
how did you decide which data to collect)? Was the data something you think your teacher might be
able to act on? In what ways did the responses you decided upon influence the neutrality of the
questionnaire?
You can take an online version of the test by using the QR code on the right.
One very famous experiment in the history of psychology is the Milgram experiment from the 1960s. This
experiment is very popular to discuss in TOK, but very often is not fully developed or analysed from a TOK
perspective. A thorough discussion is offered here.
CASE STUDY
The Milgram experiment
In January 1942, a Nazi officer by the name of Adolf Eichmann was charged with the task of sorting out
the logistics of the mass deportation of Jews living in Europe to extermination camps in eastern Europe.
After the war, Eichmann evaded capture, but in 1960 he was finally found in Argentina by the Israeli
secret service. He was brought back to Israel for trial, was found guilty of war crimes and sentenced to
death. He was executed in 1962. Throughout the trial, Eichmann insisted that he was not responsible for
the intention to murder Jews, nor was he part of any decision-making hierarchy of the Nazi leadership;
he insisted he was merely following orders. However, he also admitted to never letting his emotions,
including sympathy for the individuals who were on the trains he had organized, interfere with his work.
He insisted he was a product of his times and that only those responsible for the decisions should be
responsible for the crime (Kershner).
Should we accept such an excuse? Is it really plausible that individuals, in the full knowledge of the pain
and suffering they cause, can shrug off responsibility for horrific actions against others, simply because
they were ‘following orders’? Or, was this plea simply an excuse? Surely someone who otherwise
harboured no animosity to an individual could never be persuaded to harm or kill that person simply
because they were ordered to do so by someone in authority. From a TOK perspective, we might use
the experiments and their results to explore our beliefs about authority and how authority works from a
knowledge perspective.
As it turned out, there was no learner. The teacher was the test subject and the scientist issuing the
orders was an actor. As the teacher pushed the button, thinking that he was administering shocks, a
recorded voice from the other room would scream in pain and terror and beg the teacher to stop the
experiment. When the voltage reached a high enough level, the shouting stopped altogether, as if the
Milgram says that the main finding, that adults are willing to follow the command of an authority almost
‘to any lengths’, demands explanation. The conclusion that we are likely to follow orders even to the
detriment of others is a psychological claim, that is, it is a claim about human psychology. So, what can
we make of it from a Theory of Knowledge perspective?
We might consider the results from the perspective of what other knowledge or background beliefs the
participants were holding which might explain their behaviour beyond the straightforward claim that
‘people obey authority’.
As it turns out, the results of the Milgram experiment are far less clear than we might expect. The rate at
which the participants would administer high-voltage shocks were highest in those conditions which are
the most famous: where the participant sits at a bank of switches, overseen by a ‘scientist’ in a white
coat, and where the ‘learner’ is being shocked in another room, all on the campus of a hugely prestigious
university.
One requirement for following orders to the extent that the participants did would be that the participants
must already accept or believe in, the legitimacy of that authority. Milgram required that his researchers
(the ‘scientist’ in the room) be costumed in the traditional white coat. This produced in the minds of the
participants an awareness of both the expertise of the ‘scientist’ (an authority: a source of scientific
knowledge) and an awareness of his being in authority. In the initial experiments, Yale students and
people from the surrounding city were brought into the university to perform the experiments. This
environment would have also reminded the participants that something important was going on. Finally,
that it was a scientific experiment, would have suggested that the work itself was important; they were in
the search of ‘scientific knowledge’. Together, these factors produce an environment which activated a
number of pre-existing beliefs in the minds of the participants having to do with the legitimacy of the
‘scientist’, the prestige of the institution they were in and the general importance of the work. It is not at
all clear that it was simply a tendency towards obedience that motivated the people to administer fatal
shocks; it was also due to a set of beliefs about what sorts of things we should be obedient towards.
Milgram changed the conditions in a variety of ways and the results varied dramatically. When the
experiment was held outside prestigious Yale University, the rate of obedience fell to 50 per cent. When
the ‘learner’ and participants were in the same room (so the participant saw the actor getting a shock),
the results dropped to 40 per cent. If the ‘scientist’ is on the phone or didn’t show genuine interest in
whether the participants obeyed or not, or if the scientist was thought to be a non-scientist, the rate
dropped to 20 per cent. If there were two scientists who disagreed about whether the participant obeyed,
the rate dropped to zero (‘The Bad Show’, Radiolab 2012 and Mcleod 2014).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do other AOKs have more or fewer ethical constrains on the construction of knowledge than the human
sciences? What do you think explains your answer?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Power
Another interesting TOK-related element of this experiment are the prompts of the ‘scientist’ during the
experiment. Their language had drastic effects on the behaviour of the participants.
There were four scripted responses to be used by the ‘scientist,’ when the participant showed reluctance
to continue:
• ‘Please continue.’
• ‘The experiment requires that you continue.’
• ‘It’s absolutely essential that you continue.’
• ‘You have no other choice but to continue.’ (Mcleod 2017)
You can see that the language of the second and third prompts remind the participants of the necessity
of the experiment. However, when the ‘scientist’ used the final prompt, reminding the participant of the
role of choice in their actions, none of the participants continued with the experiment. Every one of them
refused, once reminded of choice. It seems that the basic belief that we have a choice of how we should
behave is strong, even in the face of authority. Once reminded of that choice, participants made their
choice and stopped the experiment.
The fact that Milgram was careful enough in his design of the experiment to think about how language
might influence the results shows just how important getting the language of interaction in psychological
experiments right really is.
Another well-known experiment which underscores the significant effect language has on eyewitness
testimony is provided by Loftus and Palmer in their 1974 experiment. They asked participants to watch a
video of a car crash, then asked participants to estimate the speed at which the cars were travelling
when they collided. However, when asked about the collision, different words were used to describe the
impact.
The variant questions were ‘about how fast were the cars going when they
smashed/collided/bumped/hit/contacted each other?’ It turns out that the choice of word in the question
influenced the speed estimated, with the average estimate of ‘smashed’ being 10 miles per hour faster
than ‘contacted’. Additionally, although the videos of the collisions showed no broken glass, participants
who had been asked about the cars ‘smashing’ into one another were more likely to report that they had
seen broken glass in the video (Mcleod 2014).
Economics makes heavy use of models. The AD–AS model is one such example. This is a model because it is a
human construction which is meant to illustrate some phenomenon in the world. It is a graphical representation of an
interpretation of real-world phenomenon: the aggregate (total) demand (AD) and the aggregate supply (AS).
The curves also function as analogies in that the curves are mathematical in nature (graphs are mathematical tools)
and can be the source of discussions about what happens when you alter the values represented in the graph. The
equation for the aggregate demand is:
You don’t need to understand any of the details to understand that by changing one variable in the equation (e.g.
government spending (‘G’)) , the other variables will necessarily change as well. This is the internal logic of the
model.
DEEPER THINKING
What is an analogy?
An analogy is a way of comparing two seemingly unlike situations. Like metaphors and similes, they can
offer a new perspective to something by comparing it in surprising ways to unlike objects. Metaphors and
similes are different, however, in that they offer static comparisons, meaning that they don’t necessarily
involve a logical progression. Therefore, in using a metaphor and saying that ‘the old man was a
buzzard’, the emphasis remains on the old man, and the purpose of likening him to a buzzard is to bring
out some characteristics of his personality. We don’t have to think much about the buzzard to make the
application.
Analogies are slightly different in that they generally contain an internal logic. When saying that situation
A is analogous to situation B, we mean that there is a series of logical relationships within situation A
that we want to use to uncover certain dynamics in situation B. There is an argument or a description or
an explanation of situation A, that is then applied to situation B, but B might not be fully explained. We
explored a famous analogy in the Perspectives section of Chapter 6, where we discussed the design
argument for the existence of God (pages 193–5). The idea was that situation A (the complexity found in
a pocket-watch requires the logical assumption of a designer, the watchmaker) is analogous to situation
B (the complexity of the world indicates the existence of a designer, God). The point is that the argument
really only occurs in situation A. We have to understand the logical progression in A and then we apply
that understanding to B, but the evidence that the logic works only comes from situation A. The claim
that the logic works in situation B is only an assumption. One way to think of this is that in the use of
analogies, we really only learn more about situation A. The assumption is that it applies to B is only that,
an assumption.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What models are used in other AOKs? What makes a good or bad model? In what ways do the models
used impact the knowledge being conveyed?
ACTIVITY
Understanding and using the AD and AS curves (or any other mathematical model) requires an
understanding of the mathematical and logical relationships within the graph. However, the relationship
between producers, consumers, buyers and sellers in the real world are not mathematical, they are
social.
1 Knowing this, do you think that the analogy between the changes described in the AS and AD curves
represent genuine phenomena in the real world?
2 Does the use of these models affect how one justifies, or explains, economic phenomena in the real
world?
Assessment advice
The AS–AD model is an important model in economics and its effectiveness could be analysed in the
context of a TOK essay, provided the question allows it. Many of the AOKs use models to explore the
world and you might be able to build strong comparisons by evaluating how effective the different
models are.
ACTIVITY
1 How do you think the inclusion of mathematical modelling in economics influences the reliability of the
subject? Does it become more or less reliable?
2 While it might be a mathematical fact that shifting the values on the graph around will result in other
values shifting, what relation does that fact have to events in the real world?
As we’ve discussed above, the economy is an incredibly complex phenomenon with innumerable interconnected
parts. How best to approach the study of it? We might consider the economy as being similar to something like a
hurricane. Hurricanes are nothing more than a system of incredibly complex and interconnected natural phenomena.
If we knew everything about each component of that system (wind velocity, fluid dynamics, ocean temperature and
currents, etc.), then we could presumably predict the behaviour of hurricanes exactly, like we can predict the arrival
of a solar eclipse in 10 000 years’ time. It is just physics; run the numbers (if you know how!) and see what you get.
The only problem is that the calculations are infinitely complex. Any unpredictability comes from our lack of a
complete understanding and inability to deal with that number of variables.
The economy (and human behaviour in general), however, has as its subject the unpredictable creature that is a
human being. We are not like the physical objects and forces involved in a hurricane, but rather complex creatures
whose decisions and behaviour is often unpredictable (even at the micro-level).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What assumptions underline the methods used in the human sciences?
In order for there to be any hope of developing a ‘science’ of the economy (where economists identify and articulate
‘laws’ which individuals within the economy follow), there must be a set of core assumptions which simplify the
erratic behaviour of humans. In economics those assumptions take the varied and multi-dimensional human beings
and turn them all into the same sort of thing: ‘a rational decision maker’ or a ‘rational agent’, someone who makes
decisions based on reason and whose decisions can therefore be predicted.
The suggestion is that when faced with decisions, an individual will make decisions based on reason rather than
emotion. If you cannot really afford a new phone, no matter how many of your friends have it, or how fantastic that
phone is, you won’t buy it. You would consider your disposable income, your current financial commitments, weigh
up your need or demand for the phone against other goods and services that you need and make the best decision.
What constitutes the ‘best’ decision is determined by the second main assumption in economic theory, namely, that
people seek to maximize their profit. In this case, then, you would want to make sure that buying any other phone
wouldn’t leave you with more money and/or more satisfaction. (Economists calls this ‘opportunity cost’.) You
would pass on the really bad phone and buy the expensive one, even though the bad one might have been the
cheapest, because the bad phone would lower your overall satisfaction. But if there was a phone with exactly the
same functionality but half the price, you would feel dissatisfied by buying the expensive version because you
would know you paid too much. There are two key assumptions at work, therefore; first, that you will be making a
rational decision, and second, that you will make it to maximize your profit-to-satisfaction ratio.
As we see time and time again, though, people don’t really act like the rational machines they are assumed to be. We
see people pouring coins into gambling machines because they think the next spin simply must be a winner since all
the previous were losing spins. We buy things that we know are wildly overpriced because we cannot bear to wait
until we can find the cheaper versions and we know that everyone else will have it too. We buy things we know we
don’t need, and at prices we know are too high for all sorts of reasons, few of them ‘rational’.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What assumptions about human beings are made by other AOKs?
Do other AOKs also have to assume that human beings act rationally if they hope to construct
knowledge about the human world?
ACTIVITY
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Interpretation
The sciences use a similar language when talking about what they produce. Concepts like ‘law’ and
‘theory’ are both used in the natural and human sciences, but their meanings are slightly different. In
each case they refer to regular patterns that are observed in the world.
Laws in the natural sciences are descriptions of regular and repeatedly observed phenomena; they
describe a regularity in the world. In physics, these laws are often depicted in mathematical terms. Laws
are developed when repeated observations are obtained and described, for example, the law of gravity
or a law of thermodynamics.
There are laws in the human sciences, too. In economics there are laws like the law of demand (the
higher the price, fewer people will want it), the law of supply suggests that as the price of a good goes
up, producers will tend to make more of it. Say’s law (which Keynesians dispute) suggests that as
production of a good increases, so too does the aggregate demand for it.
ACTIVITY
Compare and contrast the development of laws and theories in the human sciences and the natural
sciences. You should research Kuhn’s notion of ‘paradigm shifts’ to do this.
1 Create a list of reasons why paradigms will shift in the natural sciences and see if you can identify
similar shifts in the human sciences.
2 What do the similarities and differences between the AOKs suggest about their scope? Are they trying
to answer similar questions?
3 Are their methods similar enough for them both to be called ‘science’? Does your answer depend on
which discipline within the human sciences you’re considering?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
If two competing paradigms give different explanations of a phenomenon, how can we decide which
explanation to accept?
Another fundamental assumption at the heart of economics is the assumption of ceteris paribus, which is a Latin
phrase meaning ‘all other things being equal’. (You might recognize ‘ceteris’ as being similar to ‘et cetera’ which
means ‘and others’.) While the rational agent is part of the starting point of economics, ceteris paribus is an
assumption which helps economists make and test predictions. What it means is that the economist can assume that
all the other variables in a system remain the same, so they focus on only one variable at a time. It is the same move
that a natural scientist will make in their lab when they only change one variable to see its effect.
However, this assumption has a downside:
Like prices, many other factors that affect the economy or finance are continuously in flux. Independent
studies or tests may allow for the use of the ceteris paribus principle. But in reality, with something like
the stock market, one cannot ever assume ‘all other things being equal’. There are too many factors
affecting stock prices that can and do change constantly; you can’t isolate just one. (Kenton 2019b)
The difference is that the market or the ‘economy’ is a wonderfully complex system with untold numbers of
variables, any of which might be having an effect on the outcomes. When economists construct models to
understand how certain variables relate to one another, they will pin down all of the other variables that they are not
interested in so that those variables don’t affect the results. This is very helpful for economists as it helps them
explore cause-and-effect relationships (generally with a model). They can develop predictions related to one variable
and see if their predictions come true. However, the models are not reality, so, in effect, those other variables are
still exerting whatever influence they will naturally exert, meaning that the model’s predictive power is hampered.
ACTIVITY
1 Given these pretty fundamental assumptions at the heart of economic theory, how reliable do you
think it is as a ‘human science’?
2 Mathematics has become a large part of the ‘language’ of economics. What role do you think that the
inclusion of mathematical principles in the laws of economics plays in how reliable it is?
3 Does mathematics play a similar role in other AOKs?
Learner profile
Caring
How do ethical considerations affect our study of other human beings?
ACTIVITY
If an economy isn’t designed to maximize profit, what else could it be designed to achieve?
1 Use the QR codes to watch Dan O’Neill’s TEDx talk and Kate Raworth’s TED talk. They each present
a different vision for what values economic theory should be designed to achieve. What are those
visions? Do you think they are realistic?
2 What character traits and motives in human beings do you think might make adoption of these
different visions a challenge? What new motives (other than ‘maximizing profit’) would need to take
their place?
3 Do you think it is appropriate for a human science to make these sorts of value judgments?
CASE STUDY
Little Albert
One particularly heart-wrenching example is the case of ‘Albert B’ or ‘Little Albert’. In the 1920s, Dr John
Watson of Johns Hopkins University wanted to test the theory that by exposing an infant to
environmental pressures he could create psychological states like fear. He was confident that the
environment was the main determiner in our behaviour and thought that he could show that he could
condition human behaviour. He claimed:
Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in
and I’ll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I
might select – doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and yes, even a beggar-man and thief,
regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors.
(Smith 2017)
Watson was building on the work of Pavlov, who showed that he could get dogs to salivate at the sound
of a bell by ringing it a number of times while presenting food. He did this until the dogs would salivate at
the sound of the bell even when no food was present. In Watson’s case, he started with a baby (Little
Albert) who had no particular fear of animals or white fuzzy things. He stood behind Albert with a
hammer and bar and would strike the bar at the same time as presenting Albert with a white rat. Albert
would be startled by the sound and burst into tears. Very quickly, he learned to associate white rats with
loud frightening noises and soon would cry and try to get away from white rats even without the loud
noise. So effective was this conditioning that Albert seem to be afraid of many animals and even soft
fuzzy things that were not animals, like fur coats. Watson had confirmed his initial hypothesis.
However, the trauma on Little Albert seems a high price to pay in constructing this claim. Our ethical
discomfort here is multiplied when we learn that there was no attempt to ‘de-condition’ Little Albert after.
Presumably, this fear of soft fuzzy things lingered for some time. What happened to Little Albert after the
experiments is not known for sure (Smith 2017). Use the QR code to read a description of classical
conditioning and to watch a video of Little Albert.
CASE STUDY
UCLA Schizophrenia study
Another case shows that even when the participants are not directly harmed, they nevertheless need
protecting, especially in terms of how much they know about what is going to happen to them during the
experiments. In a study which began in 1983, UCLA doctors wanted to find out how patients with
schizophrenia would respond to having their treatment withdrawn: what would be the effects and how
serious would they be?
Patients were informed that the point of the experiment would be to withdraw their medication and that
their conditions might ‘improve, worsen or remain unchanged’, but they were not told about how severe
any relapses might be, how soon a relapse might come or how long it would be until they would return to
their medication. One patient suffered a particularly severe relapse and threatened to kill his parents,
and another relapsed and ultimately committed suicide. Researchers defended the study, saying that
they didn’t drive patients into relapse (so not directly harming them), but others suggest that the fact that
the basic aim of the study was to have patients regress and that the patients themselves were unaware
of possible consequences means that the study was unethical (Hilts).
In an effort to hold psychological researchers to a high ethical standard, the American Psychological Association has
provided the ‘Ethical Principles of Psychologists and Code of Conduct’ which provides the guidelines and rules
designed to protect participants and researchers from unethical research practices. Central to the code is the notion of
informed consent, which means that participants need to be made aware of all aspects of the research which may
affect their decision to take part, including any short-term harm or possible long-term consequences. Before
consenting to take part, participants must understand:
• the purpose of the research, expected duration and procedures
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
To what extent are the methods used in the human sciences limited by the ethical considerations
involved in studying human beings?
Do other AOKs have similar ethical limitations on the construction of knowledge?
ACTIVITY
Research other questionable experiments involving humans, but which were genuine attempts to
construct what could be useful knowledge about human beings. You might consider the following:
• The Tuskegee and Guatemalan Syphilis experiments
• The Neubauer triplets experiments
• The Monster stuttering experiment
• The use of prisoners as test subjects
• The case of Henrietta Lacks
• The Stateville Penitentiary Malaria Study.
These are common examples and many more can be found in an internet search. Try to develop a clear
TOK-style analysis by exploring the value of scientific knowledge in relation to the ethical principles that
you think are being violated. In some cases, you might analyse the role of the participants’ beliefs and
the circumstances surrounding their decisions to participate, or any justification that the research had for
choosing that particular population of test subjects. Does it matter that a small number of people were
harmed (sometimes being unaware of that harm), when the knowledge gained will benefit many others?
ACTIVITY
1 To what extent do you think there is a conflict between the search for genuine scientific knowledge
about human behaviour and human psychology and the expectation that patients be treated according
to some code of ethical behaviour?
2 What value do you think research might provide, even if the methods by which it was gained violate
an ethical code?
TOK trap
Don’t try to argue whether these examples are ‘right’ or ‘wrong’. That is a philosophical debate. Your job
as a TOK student is to identify and explore the ethical implications of those examples of knowledge
construction, whatever the ethical judgments.
TOK trap
Notice that the horrific experiments conducted by the Nazis on their prisoners is not included in the list.
This is because too many students automatically default to Nazis whenever these sorts of questions
arise. They are good examples, but often students simply refer to these experiments to illustrate their
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
point without analysing the dynamics involved. When you are seeking examples, try to find those that
might not be used by many others. Some of the examples above are actually quite common, but you can
nevertheless turn them into good examples by offering precise and clear analysis.
ACTIVITY
Finally, discuss and debate the following question with your classmates:
Do you think that knowledge in the human sciences is hindered by ethical constraints?
Learner profile
Open-minded
How does the appreciation of different perspectives enrich our understanding of history?
ACTIVITY
These accounts and images all relate to the same event.
1 What are the differences?
2 What differences can you see in the details and facts provided?
3 Do you think some are more or less reliable than others?
4 What knowledge do you think the differences and similarities between these resources raise? Write
these issues down and keep track of them as you read through the rest of the chapter.
The historian, however, does not have this privilege. The events that are being described, like the events at Wounded
Knee in 1890, have disappeared into the past, never to be seen again. The places might exist, for a time the people
might still exist (the last of the soldiers present died in 1964 (McNally)), but the event itself no longer exists. Those
were one-off occurrences which have disappeared into time. How, then, are we able to say anything about what
happened and how are we to be sure that what we say happened is an ‘accurate’ reflection of what really happened?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is it possible to have knowledge of the past?
ACTIVITY
1 What did you do a week ago last Saturday? Where did you go? Who were you with? While your own
memory might be a convincing method by which you can determine what you were doing, do you have
any other evidence to which you could appeal to prove that you were, in fact, doing what you
remember doing? You might compile a statement from a witness who saw you there. You might have
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do other AOKs rely on the choices made by individuals as much as history? How does this affect the
quality of the knowledge produced?
How accurate would you say that your partner’s account is? Given the evidence that you provided to your partner,
was it complete? We mentioned that the events themselves were gone and that a historian cannot recreate the events
(in a way that natural scientists can). Historians are left to build an understanding of the events through evidence.
Eye-witness accounts, physical artefacts, other references and other accounts are what the historian must use to piece
together the events of the day. The historian cannot recreate the event to gather new evidence but is instead limited
to what evidence happens to exist. This is a significant difference between history and natural science that we’ll
explore shortly.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is it possible in other AOKs to describe the same phenomenon in such different ways?
However, a chronological account of events is not the only aspect of what a historian does.
Consider this: Would you agree that the account your partner gave of your day was even adequate or are there
important elements missing, like why you did the things you did, or how you felt doing them, or what the results of
what you did were? Perhaps instead of arbitrarily choosing some day in your own history, we had asked you to think
about a day of significance to you, perhaps a family wedding or reunion, or a special visit to an important place.
Would a moment-by-moment list of what happened be enough to capture that day?
ACTIVITY
1 Think back through your life. What would you say is your most important day? Of all the days you
have to choose from, try to think of one that you think has been the most important. We are not going
to define ‘important’ for you, but to complete the task, you will need to make a decision about what
criteria you will use for a day to be more or less important.
2 How did you choose what was going to be important? You must have had to consider that day in
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
relation to later events; a day cannot really be important if there are no subsequent consequences. Did
you have to take into consideration things which happened before that day as well?
One of the things which you probably came across in that activity was the idea of cause and effect. In other words,
something about that day had huge effects on your future life and identifying and articulating the importance of that
day (explaining why it was important) required you to link that day to later days, and possibly even earlier days.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do the terms ‘cause’ and ‘effect’ have different meanings in the sciences, history and mathematics?
By way of introduction to history as an area of knowledge, then, we have considered two very important elements of
doing history:
• Firstly, the historian is interested in finding out what happened, that is identifying facts about the events that
happened in the past – this might be captured by the idea of chronology mentioned above. Without these facts,
historians would really be nothing other than fiction writers.
• Secondly, historians move beyond this list of events which we accept happened and move to a discussion of those
facts in relation to one another. It is not enough to simply point out that X and Y and Z happened on some day;
rather, historians seek to argue that Z happened because of Y, or that Y was a consequence of X, or that X was the
origins of Y and Z. In other words, the events that a historian studies happen generally for reasons, they are not
(or not always) accidents. In your previous study of history, you might have come across questions like, ‘What are
the origins of the Second World War?’ or, ‘What explains the success of the Spanish conquest of South America?’
These questions take for granted the idea that the Second World War or the Spanish conquest of South America
didn’t happen by accident; there were a number of events which had to happen first, in order for those events to
happen, and historians work to understand those reasons.
Our discussion so far has drawn on a very important starting point in the discussion of history as an AOK. There are
different ways we might use the term ‘history’. We might use it to describe those things which happened in the past.
When we say that we ‘all have our own histories’, we are using the term ‘history’ in this way, simply to refer to the
obvious fact that things have happened to us in the past. ‘History’ can also refer to ‘what professional historians do’.
History is an academic discipline wherein historians look into the past, identify events and explore, reflect on and
articulate the relationships between those events. This latter sense of the word ‘history’ is what concerns us in the
world of TOK. Professional historians call this ‘historiography’, which means, broadly, the study of how we
describe the past. It is a naturally critical process, meaning that responsible historians take great pains to create
reliable or credible descriptions of the past, ones that are well tied to established facts. Otherwise, the product is
merely fiction.
We are perfectly willing to accept that things happened in the past and this is one form of knowledge. But the
historical knowledge that we in the TOK classroom are most concerned by, the questions and the tensions which
arise, begin the moment we try to describe what happened. Even if we accept that things happened to us in the past,
it is not entirely clear how we can or how we should access those events.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is it easier to identify a fact in other AOKs than in history?
The suggestion is that even attempting an ‘impartial’ examination of the evidence requires some element of
interpretation. As we will see later in the chapter, historical events do not speak for themselves: historians select
evidence, they categorize it and they relate events in a way that transcends the mere events. From their perspective,
historians can see the causes and consequences in a way that the people involved in the events could not. ‘Hindsight
is always 20/20’ suggests just this fact: that from where we stand, we can see more than what the people in the past
could have seen.
We hope to convince you that history as an AOK is one of the most important elements of the TOK course and one
which could be the most useful as you are thinking about modern culture and the current state of our political
landscape. Being skilled in developing a reliable and credible historical analysis is a guard against what has come to
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do you think other AOKs impact the ways in which people think of themselves or self-identify in the
same way?
History is not a straightforward chronology of events leading to now, for as we saw earlier with the events of 30
December 1890 at Wounded Knee, there are any number of ways we might describe an event. That there was an
event is one thing – how we describe it is another, and how it guides us, is yet another.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Is truth the goal of historical inquiry? Do other AOKs treat the concept of ‘truth’ differently than History?
DEEPER THINKING
Historical ‘facts’
Throughout this chapter we will be discussing historical facts, sometimes distinguishing them from what
historians write (histories) and sometimes distinguishing them from other types of facts (eg, scientific
facts). But what is a historical ‘fact’?
Generally, a fact is some way that the world is. Our claims about the world are true or false depending
on whether or not they actually describe a fact. In most cases we would agree that it is a fact that Brazil
is south of Guatemala – that is just how the world is. The claim ‘Brazil is south of Guatemala’ is true
because it corresponds with this fact (for more on this, see the section Knowledge, belief and opinion in
Chapter 2 – page 42).
Consider now the following facts which you might see in the AOK of history:
• Singapore became an independent republic in 1965.
• The Japanese army laid siege to Allied forces in Kohima in 1944.
• Montezuma II was an Aztec ruler in the sixteenth century.
• In the UK, women were given the same right to vote as men in 1928.
These facts are ‘historical’ in that they are about events that happened in the past, but you wouldn’t want
to confuse these with what history as an AOK really is. The historian will certainly seek out these facts,
but a simple list of such facts does not amount to a history. Such facts can be considered ‘building
blocks’ which the historian uses to construct historical narratives that link such facts together into
genuine histories. For instance, while it is a fact that Singapore gained its independence in 1965, a
historian would be more interested in what the causes of this event were.
Consider the differences between the facts listed on the left and what the historian might be more
interested in:
• How did British colonialism impact the role Singapore played when it was a state in the Malaysian
federation from 1963 to 1965?
• To what extent did the events at Kohima contribute to the overall Allied victory over Japan?
• In what ways did Spanish conquistador Hernán Cortés use local mythology to effectively weaken the
Aztec position in Mexico?
• What actions by Emmeline Pankhurst and her daughters were the most significant in the women’s
suffrage movement?
These questions, and their answers, are not factual in the same way as the others. They are built of
facts, and the answers to these questions cannot be separated from such facts, but their answers are
debatable in a way that the others are not. While the facts in the first list on the left might be debated to
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
some extent, they can be evidenced by memory, documents and other artefacts to such a degree that
they are considered beyond doubt. The answers to the questions, however, require historians to make
arguments and ultimately remain debatable. This is largely because they seek to make claims about
cause and effect relationships and connections between facts, which cannot be seen or tested, but also
because they require interpretation by the historian. Given a set of facts and a question, historians must
make choices, apply theories and interpret facts in a way that provides connections between them. The
strength of an historical interpretation depends both on the amount and strength of the facts the
interpretation is based on, and the general plausibility of that interpretation. It would be implausible, for
instance, to think that British colonialism had no impact on the relationship between Singapore and the
rest of the Malaysian federation, given the British role in creating the economic strength of Singapore in
the region.
How best to articulate the answers to the set of questions? It won’t do to simply list further facts because
concepts like ‘most significant’, ‘effective’, ‘to what extent’ and ‘impact’ require a different form of writing.
We usually call this form ‘historical narrative’ to bring out the nature of historical writing. The idea is that
the historian creates a narrative which links the facts together. The term ‘narrative’ might bring to mind
novels (and we will consider the relationship between historical narratives and fictional narratives
shortly). However, the term here is meant to point out that historical writing comprises an internally
coherent set of connections which link facts together into a story that provides a message, an argument
or a standpoint, in a way that facts cannot. Writing histories, then, also requires a level of creativity which
a TOK student might consider when thinking about the reliability of historical knowledge. Keeping with
the facts-as-building-blocks theme, the facts are the blocks and the history is the house built with the
blocks.
However, this role of interpretation and the creative ways in which historians must step beyond simply
listing facts in chronological order when developing a historical narrative raises many questions which
this chapter seeks to address.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
As suggested earlier, there are facts that historians cannot avoid and which are central to the task of the historian.
Things happened in the past whether or not we know that they happened and regardless of how much we know
about them, and it is partly the historian’s job to explain these facts. These facts are the stuff of chronology. For
example, in 1863, Abraham Lincoln addressed a crowd on the battlefield in Gettysburg Pennsylvania in what has
become known as the ‘Gettysburg Address’. We know quite a few facts about this event. At the other end of the
spectrum, there are also a number of facts surrounding the moai, the human figures on the island of Rapa Nui
(Easter Island), but we know far fewer of them. We believe that they were carved sometime between AD 1250 and
1500, but don’t really know by whom, or why.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What counts as a fact in history?
There is a sense in which these facts are objective in that they are the way they are, they cannot change, no matter
what we think of them. The trouble with these facts, however, is that there is an infinite amount of them, and most
have left no trace. Consider all the facts surrounding the most banal interactions between people since the beginning
of time: all the dialogue and all the moving about which has never been recorded and which has been immediately
forgotten. While there certainly are facts regarding these events, they are utterly lost to historians today, even if they
were interested in them. One can imagine a historian making the following claim: ‘In the Spring of 1653, William,
living in Market Harborough, England, said “Good Morning” to his mother.’ Perhaps it is a true claim, but it is a
claim which has no hope of ever being evidenced. This element of evidence is the crucial element of how historians
deal with the infinite number of these sorts of facts: without some element of evidence that the claim is true, the
purported fact it captures is insignificant.
Facts – events which happened – are therefore absolutely crucial to the historian, and evidence for these facts are a
necessary element. Without the evidence for some fact, the use of that fact is nothing more than fiction in the mouth
of a historian.
As we suggested earlier, however, the facts themselves are not all that a historian deals with. Simply listing a
chronology of facts, one thing happened after another, is a framework for the historian, but historians are far more
interested in the relationships between those facts. Rather than saying, for instance, that the Rapa Nui people carved
the human figures we find on Easter Island at a certain time and place, the historian wants to know why they did so.
What was happening before their decision to build them and what happened as a consequence of their building
them? Similarly, with Lincoln at Gettysburg: why was he standing in that field giving the address? What had
happened which led him to be standing there rather than in his office in Washington DC? Why did he choose those
words and what were their significance to those who were listening?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Are other AOKs limited in what can be known in the way history might be?
These questions of why people did the things they did are a different sort of historical fact, however. Unless we find
some sort of inscription where someone explains the human carvings or we find a diary entry where Lincoln spells
out every element of his Gettysburg address, historians are tasked with constructing for themselves the reasons why.
These types of claims are a challenge in that, while they are based in evidence, they do go beyond the types of
historical facts mentioned above.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
If ‘all history is the history of thought’, would knowledge derived from the human sciences make for a
better historian? In what ways do experts in one AOK use the knowledge from others in developing more
reliable knowledge?
By ‘outside’ he means ‘everything belonging to it which can be described in terms of bodies and their movements’
(Collingwood). In the case of the event of ‘Caesar crossing the Rubicon’, then, this would be a description of the
soldiers, their number, their formation, their speed and direction. The outside of the event is just a description, in
other words, of what could be empirically observed were we to be witnesses to the event. It is what we could see,
what might be recorded were we to be there with our smartphones or video cameras.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do the natural sciences speak literally when they describe animal behaviour using terms like the
‘desires’ or ‘goals’ of animals?
We might think back to the opening event of the shooting at Wounded Knee to apply this distinction. A description
of the outside of the event would focus on the numbers of cavalry and Native Americans, the various movements of
the soldiers and villagers, the firing of a rifle and the subsequent running and shooting of the soldiers and villagers.
We would be making claims like:
• ‘On 30 December 1890, the 7th Cavalry was camped above a Native American village at Wounded Knee.’
• ‘Colonel Forsythe made the order for his soldiers to confiscate the weapons in the village.’
• ‘Big Foot lay ill on a pallet on the ground.’
• ‘The medicine man began to chant.’
These facts are all focused only on ‘bodies and their movements’ or what we might observe were we standing on the
bluffs that morning watching the scene unfold.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is empathy more important in history than in other AOKs?
The inside of the event, however, would be populated with another sort of fact altogether, one which focuses on the
thoughts, motives, desires, fears, plans and reasons of those present:
• ‘Colonel Forsythe resented the Native Americans and believed that Big Foot’s tribe was inherently hostile.’
• ‘Big Foot wanted a peaceful return to the Government’s reservation.’
• ‘The medicine man wanted his ancestors to come and destroy the Army.’
• ‘The US Army’s goal was to forcibly return all Native Americans to reservations.’
• ‘The deaf Native American warrior didn’t understand the commands he was given.’
While the outside of events can be described in terms of what we would observe (much like a scientist might
describe what is observed in an experiment), the inside of events requires a different sort of description. It requires a
description of thoughts. The historian, according to Collingwood, must ‘re-think’ the thoughts of the individuals in
the historical event. To develop a genuinely historical account (as opposed to a scientific account) of an event, we
must think the thoughts of the characters involved: we must understand (though not necessarily agree with) the
logical connections between the thoughts and the actions. The historian, then, in trying to understand the events at
Wounded Knee would rethink the thoughts of Forsythe as he gave the order to open fire on the village.
Understanding his command would be to understand his beliefs about the wider progress of the US Government’s
war on the Native Americans, understand his prejudice against the possible good intentions of the tribe before him
and understand the experience of anxiety and fear he was undergoing when that fateful shot rang out. Understanding
these thought processes is what a historical understanding amounts to.
Given that historical events have these two elements, Collingwood suggests that the historian’s role is to explore
each in relation to the other, albeit prioritizing the inside. He suggests that there is a difference between knowing
what happened (a scientific understanding) and understanding what happened (a historical understanding). The
historical story being told is one about people’s motives and reasons for acting the way they did, not merely a story
about what happened. A description of Caesar’s journey to Rome wouldn’t, in this view, be a ‘history’, any more
than a list of how people moved about would be a history. Through such descriptions we might know what
happened, but it would take an examination of the thoughts that motivated the actions for us to understand them.
ACTIVITY
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
1 With a partner, identify and research a historical event of interest to you. Try to identify elements of
the event which Collingwood would characterize as the outside and the inside of the event.
2 When describing the inside, try to articulate what you think would be the actual thoughts being
exhibited in the behaviour of the historical characters you are studying.
3 How confident are you that you can identify the thoughts of the individuals?
4 Are you able to step outside your own perspectives and beliefs in order to charitably understand the
thoughts of the individuals you are hoping to understand?
You might like to use a table like this:
Inside – described in terms of Outside – described in terms of bodies and their
thought movements
TOK trap
Having described and explained a TOK point, many students leave their analysis there, without exploring
the significance of that TOK point. In the context of an essay, it is one thing to explain Collingwood’s
distinction and apply it to a case: this shows a certain level of quality TOK thinking. The best students,
however, will then use the description of the TOK elements to develop an analysis of those elements.
You might consider this a ‘so what, who cares?’ moment – why is this distinction important to the over’all
discussion? What follows here is an attempt to show why Collingwood’s distinction is helpful in a more
general analysis of history as an AOK.
Why might this distinction be important for the TOK student? Collingwood’s distinction helps us understand the
differences between the AOKs of history and science, which then helps us further understand the nature of history as
a way of knowing the world. According to Collingwood, our understanding of nature does not require anything like
an inside to an event. The events that science describes are only described in terms of bodies and their movement;
from tectonic plates shaping the world’s landmasses, to the infinitesimally small electron shells at the subatomic
level, the natural sciences describe how bodies interact. Any ‘why’ questions asked about interactions between
bodies will only refer to natural forces, not anything like independent human thought:
In the case of nature, this distinction between the outside and the inside of an event does not arise. The
events of nature are mere events, not the acts of agents whose thought the scientist endeavors to trace …
Instead of conceiving the event as an action and attempting to rediscover the thought of its agent, the
scientist goes beyond the event, observes its relation to others, and thus brings it under a general formula
or law of nature. (Collingwood 214)
The general formulas or laws of nature sought by scientists that Collingwood is referring to are laws that apply to all
cases. The historian, however, recognizes that the thoughts and reasons which are in the minds of the agents they are
exploring are unique to the situation and constitute a one-off circumstance. Understanding the event is to understand
those unique circumstances.
The human sciences also study human behaviour, so what makes history different from the human sciences? The
same thing applies here; the goal of the scientist (natural or human) is to try to develop ‘general formulas or laws of
nature’. Human scientists, unlike historians, will try to explain human behaviour by developing law-like
generalizations which suggest that all humans would behave in a certain way because they are humans. That is, the
reasons why people behave the way they do is because of some characteristic which is common to all human beings.
The historian, in Collingwood’s view, however, recognizes that no humans share all their beliefs and each carries
within himself or herself a unique set of beliefs, motivations and desires which are relevant for this one moment in
time. Rather than seeking a ‘general’ law then, the historian is attempting to uncover and articulate the specific
reasons that were impacting the people involved at that moment.
The thought that the historian must in some sense re-think or re-enact the thoughts of the people they study raises a
couple of challenging questions for the historian. Firstly, how can the modern historian guarantee that they are able
to properly understand exactly what was going through the minds of the people they are considering? Historians are
people too and carry with them a whole series of beliefs, expectations and perspectives which will become part of
their attempt to understand the thoughts of the individuals they study, but those individuals are themselves part of a
different cultural context. Trying to recreate thoughts of individuals who are from an entirely different time and
context and trying to do so charitably (in a way that takes the other culture seriously) might be a real challenge.
Collingwood also raises the point that in recreating the thoughts of the individuals being studied we are naturally
critical of those thoughts. Being critical here doesn’t necessarily mean opposing the ideas, but rather testing and
reflecting on them. When we, for instance, put ourselves into the mind of Colonel Forsythe of the 7th Cavalry in
order to understand why he might have commanded his soldiers to open fire, we can understand that a person
holding Forsythe’s beliefs would act in the way he did. In doing so, however, we naturally relate Forsythe’s beliefs
(the inside of the event) to our own. We might, for instance, accept that Forsythe’s command to fire is consistent
with his beliefs, but at the same time, judge Forsythe’s beliefs about the Native Americans as prejudicial and
bigoted. This suggests that the historian’s own views about the topics being studied are always present in their
analysis of the past. The extent to which this means that the historian’s claims are reliable or not will be considered
in later sections.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Do you think experts in other AOKs are as influenced by the pressures of culture, caste, class, religion,
etc., as historians? Why or why not? How does your answer help illuminate your thoughts about the
nature of those AOKs?
The issue Guha raises has to do with just how an individual historian constructs such connections and whether or not
the connections being developed are reliable. The point he makes is that each individual historian has a personal
history. They have been raised in a certain cultural context, they have been educated a certain way and they have had
certain experiences, and these circumstances will form the context in which the individual thinks. Often these
personal experiences and circumstances will form a ‘perspective’ from which the individual naturally views the
world. There is nothing wrong with this, it’s just a fact about individuals. However, Guha points out that sometimes
we might be unaware of how these perspectives influence the way we interpret historical facts and the way that we
construct historical narratives.
‘Perspective’ comes from the Latin for ‘seeing through’. We ‘see through’ a perspective in a way that we might see
through the lenses of our glasses or a window. Extending the metaphor, the idea is that historians see through a
perspective in a similar way. Guha is not suggesting we avoid these perspectives entirely; this would be impossible.
But he is suggesting that different people with different backgrounds and experiences might bring a new perspective
to topics that have previously been explored only from one perspective. He suggests that Dalits and women should
be writing histories too, suggesting that each group might bring a new approach or a new set of questions – which
perhaps have not been thought of before.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How do different AOKs manage the influence of individual perspectives when evaluating knowledge in
that field?
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
ACTIVITY
1 Imagine that you are a professional historian writing about a topic. What do you think would be the
‘blind-spots’ in your own perspective? In other words, which characteristics or beliefs do you hold that
might affect your own historical conclusions in a way that might be considered non-objective?
2 Consider this question in relation to the following different types of historical subject-matter. Would
your own characteristics or beliefs impact these topics differently?
• The causes of a regional or world war.
• The impact of Martin Luther King Jr’s ‘I have a dream’ speech (1963) on the United States Civil
Rights Act (1964).
• The role of memorials or statues dedicated to slave owners, or people or institutions who profited
from the slave trade during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries (eg, Cecil Rhodes and the
University of Cape Town).
• Women’s suffrage movements around the world.
• The impact of the Stonewall riots (1969) on current LGBTQ+ rights and legislation.
• The growing role and impact of women legislators in your country.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is it unfair to judge people and actions in the past by the standards of today?
Guha suggests that ‘a historian has beliefs and prejudices, which, like his or her personal identity, cannot ever be
entirely suppressed. But one must continually be aware of them and seek to limit their influence on one’s work’
(Guha). It is possible, then, that one’s perspective both informs our interpretation of historical facts, but it might also
limit our ability to interpret them fairly. There must be some awareness of the impact of a historian’s own
perspectives, accompanied by an honest effort to limit their impact on their interpretations if they are to transcend
the chauvinism of their identity.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Objectivity
These issues raise questions about whether history can be objective. The short answer is ‘not really’.
Historical facts such as ‘Colgate started the mass production of toothpaste in 1873’ might be considered
objective in the sense that all rational observers would agree that the evidence settles the question.
However, we have distinguished historical fact from genuine history and the interpretations and
perspectives involved in the development of a historical narrative suggests that we cannot achieve
objectivity. Perhaps the goal should be (if such a goal is desirable) consensus. In other words, with the
understanding that historical analyses are not analyses of objects equally observable by all parties,
historians should be aiming for well-justified interpretations, which are compelling in the presentation of
their claims.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is objectivity more or less difficult for the historian than experts in other AOKs?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How might the existence of different historical perspectives be beneficial to historical knowledge?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Are all AOKs subject to the same revisions as history? Do historians treat past knowledge in the same
way as other AOKs? Is questioning previously held beliefs as important in other AOKs as it is in history?
Why or why not?
One such debate surrounds the religious beliefs of the United States’ Founding Fathers and whether or not their
beliefs are consistent with modern conservative Christian beliefs. Some historians, for instance, attempt to interpret
the Founding Fathers of the United States as holding the same types of deeply conservative religious beliefs that are
held by modern evangelical Christians, and therefore we should be able to interpret various elements of the
Constitution (1789) in light of modern Christian understanding. Others argue that given the philosophical and
religious trends of the time (and the writings of the Founding Fathers themselves), the differences between these and
the modern evangelical beliefs means that they would not have been recognizable as having a faith anything like
modern evangelical Christian beliefs. To suggest they were could be called historical revisionism: the attempt to
reinterpret established historical views in order to further modern ideologies and for modern political or religious
ends.
Use the QR code to read a longer discussion of this issue.
In March 1945, Mahatma Gandhi was asked how Indian historians could best serve the soon-to-be independent
country. How best to describe the history of India? Gandhi replied: ‘He can serve by writing a true and original
history of the people. If there is progress he will describe the process; if he finds there is decline he will record the
decline’ (Guha). What Gandhi is suggesting here is that the historian’s main role is to be honest – to describe and
record what is there – and not create fiction. This is not as easy as it seems for reasons we’ve described above: the
threat of applying uncritical or unconscious assumptions and perspectives is ever present in the historian’s work.
Given, then, that the historian must walk a fine line between admittedly working from a perspective on the one hand,
while identifying and interpreting material fairly and accurately on the other, how does a responsible historian
manage their work?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do historians have similar constraints on the methods by which they produce knowledge as experts in
other AOKs?
Selection of a topic
In order to begin the process of developing a historical narrative, the historian must find a topic which interests
them. John Dewey, a philosopher of history whom we will discuss in more detail later, argues that all historical
claims have their origin in the observations of the historian in the present, stating that ‘some present state of affairs
is always the occasion of the reconstruction of the past event’ (Dewey 224). The historian often begins with a
question arising from some experience of some present fact or observation and uses a historical analysis to develop
an answer (see page 383 for more on Dewey’s understanding of history).
That the process of history, which deals with events which are lost in the past, might begin with an immediate
observation from the present, may seem contradictory at first glance. However, think about what is happening when
we speculate about the history of some far-off event, say, what was happening 5000 years ago in the city of Ur
(which lies about 300 km upriver from the ocean on the Euphrates river in modern day Iraq). Of course, we cannot
see what was happening, but what can we see? Indeed, why do we think there was a city at all?
One thing that we can observe is the Ziggurat of Ur, which rises out of the desert by around 30 metres – you can’t
really miss it! It was discovered in the mid-nineteenth century by British archeologists and was excavated more fully
in the early twentieth century. While a historian cannot see what was happening during the construction, they can
see the product of that construction and interpret what must have happened for it to exist. Indeed, the Ziggurat sits
within a site which has been identified as the ancient city of Ur, which archeologists believe to have existed for over
5000 years. There is a wealth of artefacts which have been found there; the point being that these are what the
historians are observing here and now in the present, as they develop historical claims about the city and its people
over 5000 years ago.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Are the criteria for what counts as good evidence different for the historian than for the mathematician or
scientist?
Can the historian be free of bias in the selection and interpretation of material?
Historians have to select evidence based on the types of questions they wish to answer. Do experts in
other AOKs have similar choices to make at the beginning of their processes? How might those choices
influence the reliability of the knowledge produced?
Assessment advice
The examples we’re using here (the Ziggurat of Ur, the inscriptions on a church wall and the Hossbach
Memorandum), are artefacts – objects that are human-made – and they might be the sorts of things that
you can use as part of your internal assessment exhibition. There you must identify three human-made
objects and use them to offer a response to one of the IA prompts listed in the subject guide and used in
this book.
Dewey suggests that there are two ways in which selection affects the historian as part of the process by which they
identify relevant facts.
Firstly, the people being studied provide one layer of selection in that they select in some ways the sorts of things
that will survive to become evidence for the historian. In our examples above, for instance, someone decided to
create the inscription and the paintings for the church walls. They didn’t have to write anything on the walls, nor did
they have to write what they did. But they ‘selected’ what they did and stuck it to the walls of the church. Clearly
this choice was because they felt that the inscriptions and paintings were important. The Hossbach Memo didn’t
have to be written, but it was. Nor did it have to be written the way it was, in terms of content. But it was written
that way and this is a form of selection. We might also consider the accounts of the event at Wounded Knee with
which we opened the chapter. The first selects certain facts to portray to the reader. Regardless of what actually
happened on that morning, those facts were what the writer decided to record.
The historian, then, is faced with the consequences of the actions of the people they study, in that these people in the
past have already made a number of decisions which influence the body of evidence available to historians. The
Egyptians decided that their Pharaohs and the afterlife of the Pharaohs were more important than the workers
building the tombs. Therefore, the tombs were built of stone or carved into stone, which would presumably last
forever, while the workers’ houses were built of mud or wood, which they knew would decay over time. And decay
they did, so we have little evidence of what the workers’ homes were like. The ancient Vikings selected items to
place into their burial tombs which suggests that those items captured beliefs and ideas that were important to them
and which the historian can try to recreate. The front page of any newspaper is a selection of events which the editor
of that newspaper has selected as ‘important’ enough for the front page. A historian in one thousand years’ time
trying to understand our world might therefore have only those events to base their understanding of our time upon.
ACTIVITY
1 Consider your own social media feed on Instagram, Twitter or Facebook. What decisions have you
made in relation to what you put on your feed? Consider the types of things you could have put on
your feed. (You might even put the fact that you’re reading your TOK textbook at the moment!) Why
didn’t you put these other events onto your social media feed?
2 Consider now what you have put on your feed. What sort of impression of you do all the items you
have posted say about you to an observer? If you were a historian studying the individual who posted
all this material, what sort of impression would you have of that person? Is that historical impression
the same as what you intended?
3 Think about others whose social media feeds you follow. To what extent do you think that the
impression you’ve gained of that person through their presence on social media actually captures
what they are genuinely like?
Secondly, we have a layer of selection we’ve already hinted at: the selections made by the historian. If history is a
‘reconstruction of the past event’ based on a question in the mind of the historian, then it is possible that not every
element of evidence is relevant to the question being asked. If the historian is interested primarily in the living
conditions of the workers who built the Pyramids at Giza, for instance, then we can imagine a historian ignoring the
huge pyramids at their back as they examine more closely the scant remains of the workers’ houses at their base. If
another historian is interested in the lives of women in Native American culture, the fact that the Bismarck Weekly
Tribune doesn’t mention women, might mean that the historian would not consider the account of Wounded Knee as
evidence at all. Dewey argues that ‘from this selection there follow selective appraisals as to (1) the relative weight
and relevancy of materials at his disposal and (2) as to the way they are to be ordered in connection with one
another’ (236), by which he means that the historian is required to make choices about how much weight (if any) to
give evidence and the connections between the evidence.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Evidence
Evidence is the bedrock of knowledge. It creates the conditions under which fiction can be distinguished
from fact, or speculation can be distinguished from truth. What counts as evidence and how much is
needed are both questions we should be asking of the historian. As we’ve seen, what might be evidence
for one historian might not be for another. Where the historians are investigating different topics, this
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
might not be a problem, but if the historians are asking similar questions and identifying different
evidence, or using the evidence in different ways, then care must be taken to evaluate the reasons why
some evidence is being used while some is not. Much historical debate revolves around just what is
relevant to the question and what should count as evidence.
Learner profile
Reflective
What measures can you take to overcome your own biases?
TOK trap
Not all historians are biased. All this talk about the inevitability of historians having a perspective and the
role of selection in the historian’s identification of relevant facts, seems to lead many students to the
conclusion that in some sense ‘all historians are biased’.
However, this is not a fruitful critique for the reasons outlined on the next page.
‘Bias’ in the context of TOK refers to the ways in which information is used or interpreted. To be biased
means that you are inclined to interpret the facts presented in a way that is some how unfair or
unjustified. The classic example of this are conspiracy theories, where proponents of a theory will never
accept evidence against their position, instead always interpreting the evidence in a way that supports
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
their initial beliefs. They’ve already decided on the conclusion they wish to reach, and they will interpret
the evidence in such a way to support it, no matter what. To call someone ‘biased’, therefore, is a
critique of the way in which they are using and interpreting evidence.
To take the more general point being discussed here (that historians often interpret evidence or develop
analyses from a certain perspective) and call it bias is spreading the term too thinly. It is, what we might
call an ad hominem argument, which attacks the speaker, rather than the ideas they are presenting.
The ‘all historians are biased’ claim is basically saying that because they are historians, they must be
biased. This, then, paints all historians with the same brush and doesn’t allow us to reserve genuine
critiques against those particular historians who really do manipulate evidence and ignore responsible
historiography, or those who consciously manipulate and twist evidence towards their own ends. In
other words, we lose a tool by which to differentiate reliable historical accounts from those that are
unreliable.
Understanding the process of selecting relevant evidence might help us think through those instances
where we want to suggest that a historian is biased. We can now ask whether the historian’s selection of
the evidence is warranted, justified or ‘correct’. If not, then we might accuse them of bias; if the selection
being made is warranted, then we might say they are not biased (even if they have a perspective).
Some historians, for instance, might be interested in understanding the role of the US Government in the
current state of Native American culture in North America, but decide to entirely ignore the events at
Wounded Knee in 1890, or, perhaps, only use the material from the Bismarck Weekly Tribune
mentioned at the start of this chapter. Given the wealth of evidence available to the twenty-first-century
historian, deciding that Wounded Knee was irrelevant, or selecting only the Bismarck Weekly Tribune’s
account (and actively ignoring the rest) would be seen as irresponsible. If, in addition, the historian has
already decided that they are going to make a particular point and have therefore decided to consider
only certain evidence and disregard the rest, we would say that this historian is biased. In other words,
the historian’s application of the method was unjust, unwarranted and ‘broke the rules’ of being a
responsible historian. Instead of allowing the evidence to guide their historical interpretations, they fit the
evidence to the story.
The responsible historian is, therefore, in a difficult position. On the one hand, they must use their own interests and
questions as a way of sifting through the evidence to decide what is relevant and what is not. On the other hand, they
must make sure that they are being fair in considering what actually is relevant and not ignoring important
information. They must also make sense of the evidence in a way that doesn’t pre-judge what they think the
evidence will say or force the evidence into a narrative that they have already decided to tell. They must let the
evidence guide their interpretation.
Recognizing that there are better and worse ways of selecting and interpreting evidence in history is an important
step for the Theory of Knowledge student and allows you to explore better and worse selections of evidence. We can
then praise as ‘reliable’ a good selection of evidence, and ‘unreliable’ a poor one.
ACTIVITY
Review the discussion of cognitive bias in Chapter 1 (pages 22–24) and discuss the following questions
with your classmates.
1 How do you think these sorts of non-conscious biases might affect the reliability of historical claims?
Where in the historical method do you think it would have the most effect?
2 How might a historian challenge these non-conscious biases?
3 How much responsibility do you think a historian has to self-reflect?
4 Should historians be required to undergo the psychological tests which are meant to uncover these
biases?
Assessment advice
Curation is the process of selecting items and grouping them in a way designed to create a particular
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
impression. Your social media feeds are a curated exhibit of you, built up of images, videos and text all
designed to provide the viewer an impression of what sort of person you are. This notion of curation is
central to both of the assessment tasks but in different ways.
• For the essay, you will need to curate the ideas you’ve had on the topic presented in the prescribed
title (rather than just spilling out any old idea that happened to drift through your mind). The essay
needs to stand as a singular and crafted response.
• The exhibition requires you to identify three objects and discuss them in relation to a response to one
of the Internal Assessment prompts. For this you will need to choose or select three objects which can
each act as a response to that prompt. Again, you have the ability to choose from any number of
objects, but you must select three, and have good reasons for your selection.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
On what criteria can a historian evaluate the reliability of their sources?
Once the historian has identified material to use, they must remain critical and reflect on any bias or prejudice which
may be in the source itself. They cannot take it for granted that everything in the source is reliable. Even in the case
of primary sources, historians must remain on guard for ways in which the information being offered is unreliable.
Source criticism (something all history students will be very familiar with) requires students to ask questions like
those listed in Table 11.1.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Consider the critical questions outlined in Table 11.1. In what ways might you as a student in other
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
AOKs apply these questions to the sources you find? Is there a need to be as critical of the sources in
other AOKs?
The list of critically reflective questions in Table 11.1 is certainly not exhaustive, but it does provide a framework by
which the historian can evaluate the material from which they hope to derive a historical analysis.
Even in cases of simple eye-witness testimony, the historical researcher must take care not to assume that what is
being said is not also inaccurate in important ways. Stories of the 1912 sinking of the Titanic told by survivors
reported that the ship had risen up some 45 to 90 degrees before crashing back down as it sank in the North Atlantic
Ocean. Later, mathematicians and physicists working on the debris found that this would have been physically
impossible. The strength of the ship wouldn’t have allowed it to rise any more than about 12 degrees (Finton).
Famously, Loftus and Palmer in 1974 provided further evidence that eye-witness testimony can be altered simply by
asking questions using different words. Use the QR code for a more in-depth account of this study.
These examples suggest that the responsible historian must spend considerable time and energy on this element of
the historical method. On one hand the historian must remain sceptical and apply all that he knows about the topic to
this reflection. We’ve seen here that a thorough knowledge of the background of the topic is needed, plus an
understanding of the psychology of eye-witness testimony. On the other hand, historians must, at some level, trust
their sources once a bona fide attempt has been made to uncover any unreliability.
Synthesis
Suppose now that the historian has chosen a topic and a general question, identified and gathered relevant evidence
and facts and exposed that evidence to a robust critical examination to ascertain its reliability. What next?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is the relationship between personal experience and knowledge different in history than in other AOKs?
The next thing for the historian to do is to develop what might be called a ‘synthesis’, meaning that the historian
determines just what the evidence actually suggests. The facts and sources do not ‘speak for themselves’ in that they
ACTIVITY
Consider the opening newspaper report of the events at Wounded Knee (page 367).
1 Identify the language which you think carries an emotional impact. Do you think the writer was aware
of this impact? Why do you think the writer would have chosen to write the account in the way that he
did?
2 Do this first individually, then share your findings with a partner. Do they have similar or different
emotional reactions to the language? Why might this be? What might this suggest about the
challenges of constructing historical narratives and reading historical narratives?
Presentation
The topic has been chosen, the evidence gathered and critically assessed, and the interpretation has been developed
and justified. The final stage in the overall method is when the historian actually presents the history, ie, writes
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
down the synthesis or interpretation of the facts. Here, too, the historian must walk a fine line between a cold, hard
adherence to facts and the art of writing well. No historical narrative will be compelling if the historian cannot
‘weave a good tale’. However, when developing the language with which to express the narrative, the historian must
take care that the material is not misinterpreted.
For example, when discussing an army’s manoeuvres in the face of an enemy, do we call it an ‘attack’, or a
‘charge’? Charge certainly has far more romantic connotations. Each word might be legitimate, but the historian
might choose one over another if they are to capture and maintain their audience’s interest.
Now let’s consider this account of the final moments of the Battle of Little Bighorn in 1876, when General George
Armstrong Custer and his men were defeated in their attack/charge against the Sioux in what is now Montana:
What a sight it must have been, especially for George Armstrong Custer, who was – probably – at that
instant leading his men toward the spot on which Crazy Horse stood. Behind Crazy Horse, Custer would
have seen the thousand warriors, all painted, many with war bonnets, some holding spears high in the air,
their glistening points aimed right at Custer … The ponies were painted too, with streaks and zigzags and
other designs … They snorted and pranced, caught their second wind, and were ready for battle. (Ambrose
440)
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does it matter in other AOKs how the knowledge is presented to others? Shouldn’t the knowledge simply
speak for itself?
This passage is full of genuinely emotive and powerful imagery, and a fair bit of speculation. However, the facts
presented (the archeological evidence of the battlefield, facts about how the Sioux conducted battle and their battle
costumes, the documented behaviour of the Sioux’s ponies) are all well evidenced. The imagery and behaviour
illustrated would be entirely consistent with all the facts about the battle. However, Ambrose has woven them into a
narrative which creates a powerful scene, one that is far more engaging from a human perspective. Granted,
Ambrose is a ‘popular’ history writer, one who writes not necessarily for the community of expert historians, but for
the ‘lay historian’ (someone who is interested in history but is not academically trained as a historian). This provides
some leeway for the writer in terms of style and approach, but it still does not license him to stray from what can be
considered factual.
ACTIVITY
Compare and contrast the information about the Battle of Little Bighorn presented by Ambrose in the
excerpt on page 389 and the battlefield diagram above.
1 Which of the representations of the Battle of Little Bighorn do you think conveys the most information?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
What role does the language used to convey knowledge impact the acceptance of that knowledge in the
various AOKs? Are some AOKs susceptible to the impact of language? How do different AOKs manage
the impact of language?
Aside from maintaining the reader’s interest, however, the language used might genuinely alter the meaning and
intent of the piece. You may have noticed that throughout this chapter we have used the slightly awkward phrasing
‘the events at Wounded Knee’. This phrase is odd in that it is overly neutral and has little descriptive power – it
merely suggests that something happened at Wounded Knee. This is purposeful because the language in which those
events are usually described undoubtedly convey a particular perspective on the event. Generally, the events are
described as ‘the Wounded Knee Massacre’, connoting unjust killing. The events there have also been called ‘the
Wounded Knee Battle’ or ‘Clash’ or ‘Conflict’, and these connote something more like a pitched battle between two
foes. The point is that the words used to even identify a historical event can colour the event in the mind of the
reader. Historians must keep this in mind and justify their use of the terms. In this instance, we would prefer to use
“massacre” in identifying the events at Wounded Knee, given the evidence provided by sources.
ACTIVITY
There are many examples of how language might colour how an event is understood.
1 Research the following terms and historical events and consider the role that specific use of language
plays in the historian’s attempt to construct a justified and reliable historical account of the events. Do
you think the language used is neutral? Do you think the language used should be neutral?
• Korean comfort women
• The Rape of Nanjing
• The July Fourth Incident
• The War of Northern Aggression
• Resettlement policies in South Africa.
2 Consider the history of your own country or region. Are there other, more personal examples of the
importance of language in history?
3 Do you think that a historian would be justified in using some of the more connotative language (like
‘massacre’) in order to bring out a deeper truth about the events which might be smoothed over by
less connotative language? What might your answer suggest about the nature of history?
DEEPER THINKING
Bias and knowledge consumption
Theory of Knowledge often prioritizes the construction of knowledge in the various areas of knowledge.
However, a fruitful direction of analysis is to consider the consumption of knowledge by individuals who
have not been part of the construction of that knowledge. You are a consumer of knowledge every time
you read a book, listen to the news, listen to a podcast or browse someone’s Instagram feed.
Given all that we’ve said here about how a historian must be on the lookout for their own prejudices,
preconceptions and biases when constructing historical knowledge, how do you think your own
prejudices, preconceptions and biases might impact your consumption of knowledge? Have you ever
read something and immediately felt it must simply be false? Was this because you considered it or
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
because you held certain assumptions and were unwilling to let go of them and consider new
perspectives? Similarly, have you ever been surprised by some historical fact? If so, then this might be
an example of you bringing assumptions and pre-existing ideas to the table but showing a willingness to
allow them to be challenged.
As we consume information, we cannot help but bring with us a whole set of background beliefs,
experiences and knowledge through which we access and engage with new information. What
responsibilities do you think we have as consumers, knowing that we too are affected by our own
prejudices and preconceived notions of the world?
ACTIVITY
Consider again the scientific method described in the Methods and tools section of Chapter 9 (page 311)
and this section on the historical method.
1 What similarities between the two can you find? Do you think that they use broadly similar processes?
2 How might any similarities between the historical and scientific method apply to the question of
whether, or to what extent, historical claims can be reliable?
3 Now consider the differences between the historical and scientific method. Why do you think these
differences occur?
4 What is it about the nature or scope of science and history that might account for these differences?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is bias equally inevitable in the production of knowledge in different AOKs?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Responsibility
Understanding that the historical method is open to malpractice, historians are under some pressure to
guarantee that both their source material and their own analyses are beyond reproach. Moreover,
understanding the importance that communities place in their own shared histories, the role of the
historian in helping to define group identity shouldn’t be underestimated. (For more on this topic, see the
Ethics section that follows.) Our histories tell us who we are to a great extent. This suggests that
historians must take care when constructing knowledge, remaining self-aware in order to root out any
manipulative perspectives. We should reserve accusations of bias for those historians who perhaps
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Truth
If knowledge construction is about finding out and articulating what is ‘true’ about the world, what, then,
are we to make of the concept of truth, given all that we’ve said? To review, historians often select
evidence and different historians may select different facts and evidence depending on their own
perspectives. Despite there being a broad historical method, there are still many worries about the
reliability of the historical endeavour. There can be no ‘re-running’ of an historical event in order to find
out what really happened; instead historians have to rely on whatever evidence happens to exist, and
much of this evidence might be subject to manipulation and bias. Historians themselves might be subject
to non-conscious bias which could manipulate or shape their own interpretations, not to mention the
historians who try to manipulate their reader’s understanding by crafting their own narratives to suit their
purpose. It is not even clear how best to refer to various events without imposing an interpretation.
These worries don’t seem to bode well for the notion of historical truth.
In many respects, historians simply have to accept these problems and nevertheless continue applying
the method in the struggle towards reliable knowledge. The historian (like the scientist) might do well to
reflect on their use of the word ‘true’ and instead consider using terms like ‘reliable’ or ‘confirmed’. This is
not to suggest that we cannot fully endorse particular claims as undoubtable or certain. Calling a claim
‘true’ in the context of history, then, might be more like, ‘This claim is well-justified by the available
evidence. The interpretation of the evidence shows care and critical reflection and, while it might be
speaking from a particular interest or perspective, it nevertheless maintains academic integrity and a
responsible application of the accepted method.’ It is a bit long-winded but captures the important
elements of what makes ‘good’ history.
There is a danger here of reflecting on the nature of historical truth. We do not want to fall into the trap of
first suggesting that ‘there is no truth’ in history, and risk opening up a hole which can be exploited by
conspiracy theorists and ‘truth-deniers’. We are not denying truth by suggesting that the concept of truth
must be carefully considered in the AOK of history.
What we are suggesting is that ‘truth’ is attainable, but the focus should be on ‘reliability’ and the
reliability of a historical claim is tied directly to the quality of the evidence and interpretation. Thinking
about historical truth in terms of the appropriate use of the historical method, does not mean that
conspiracy theories like ‘there was no Moon landing’ or (far more importantly) Holocaust denial, can be
‘true’. It means rather that the holders of these conspiracy theories are very poor historians. They appear
to have allowed their own ideologies (such as a pre-existing deep distrust of government, racism or a
wilful lack of intellectual humility in ignoring convincing counterarguments) to impact their application of
the method. They ignore or wilfully misinterpret evidence, or develop interpretations that stray away from
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
evidence and drift into fiction. They consciously produce texts and documents that exploit people’s
ignorance and fear to drive home a point. Whether or not some of them are morally corrupt is one thing,
but the analysis here shows that they are very bad historians.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do historians have a moral responsibility to try to ensure that history is not misused and distorted by
people for their own ends?
However, there are instances where individuals feel that their access to information is unjustly limited – these are
what we traditionally are worried about when we worry about censorship. One form of censorship is when
journalists are censored, meaning their work is not allowed to be disseminated or when they are simply kept from
reporting on or writing about certain events. This form of censorship means that knowledge of events which are
happening in the world are kept from the general population. In most liberal democracies the ‘freedom of the press’
is a basic right and expectation. This is the idea is that journalists should be able to write about and say whatever
they like (so long as they are not lying or simply making things up) and that this is one way that keeps governments
from acting in irresponsible ways. If a journalist can write about, for instance, the human rights violations of a
government, then people will learn about this and challenge the government with legal action or vote the responsible
officials out of office.
What does the freedom of the press or censorship of journalists have to do with history as an area of knowledge or
the ethical consequences of history? Though they are, of course, quite different in nature, the work of the journalist
and the work of the historian have a lot in common. Journalism, in fact, has often been referred to as the ‘first rough
draft of history’ (Shafer).
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Journalism is the first rough draft of history.
Jack Shafer
ACTIVITY
1 Why do you think journalism might be considered as ‘the first rough draft of history’? How might a
historian use the journalism of the past in their work? What do you think the words ‘rough’ and ‘draft’
add to the idea? In what ways do you think the historian should exercise caution when reading past
news reports in their research?
2 Now extend your thinking and consider how important you think the journalist’s work is in relation to
providing future historians with material. What would happen if journalists were told what to write, or
were unable to write what they wanted because of government constraint? How might that affect a
historian in the future?
The work of the journalist supports the work of the historian to a large degree. Consider the opening of this chapter:
the report for the Bismarck Weekly Tribune has provided us as historians an account of an event which we can then
use in our creation of the historical understanding of those events. In the terms offered by Collingwood, we can use
the journalist’s work as a way of uncovering both the outside of the event (a description of what happened) and the
inside of the event (the motives and thoughts of the individuals involved). Journalists, in other words, create
evidence which later historians might use in their own historical narratives. Journalists record events, create and
gather eye-witness testimony and provide initial interpretations of events which become part of the ‘historical
record’ which later historians can use.
Like historians, journalists are meant to take an objective stance, that is, their work must be based on facts
accompanied by a reasonable and non-prejudiced interpretation of them. Journalists cannot make up facts and they
are expected to make a reasonable effort to consider the influence of their own individual biases and prejudices.
However, journalists, like historians, also make choices, deciding in many cases what needs to be reported, thereby
imposing their own interests and goals. A journalist could cover anything they wanted to, but they may find some
topics more interesting or more important than others. Some journalists have made names for themselves by actively
seeking to tell very particular types of stories.
Censorship of the press, then, can be seen as an attempt by the censors to remove evidence or facts which later
historians can use to develop historical narratives. Historians need facts to ground their narratives in truth and
censorship is a direct challenge to truth.
Imagine now a situation where a country either dictates or refuses to allow journalists the freedom to report on what
they see fit, or so constrains their work that they are unable to honestly report the facts as they see them. The effect
of this is that the events which would have been reported on are no longer part of the historical record for later
historians to make sense of. There are undoubtedly an uncountable number of events which have left no historical
record, and which therefore cannot be part of any historical account, but imagine if certain events were never
recorded. Or they were recorded in a way that only one party to the events wanted it recorded.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How are other AOKs prone to censorship and what effect might this have on the general population’s
knowledge of truth in that field?
CASE STUDY
Marie Colvin
Marie Colvin died in February 2012 in Homs, Syria while covering the civil war there. She died in a
rocket attack instigated by the Syrian government, who claimed that the city of Homs had only been
populated by rebel forces. Colvin knew better. She and her photographer colleague, Paul Conroy, had
pushed through Syrian lines into a neighbourhood Colvin knew to be populated by civilians to report on
their plight. She and Conroy were in a make-shift media centre, from where she made contact with CNN
and Channel 4 News to offer reports of what was happening.
This would create a historical record that was either incomplete because of the omissions or manipulated because the
facts are not honestly presented.
Journalists recording facts can be thought of as the construction of a collective memory, which is crucial to the
construction of truthful histories and cultural identities. ‘The memories that are public and enduring, not private and
transitory’, said John Dewey, ‘are the primary material within which conscious and deliberate historians do their
work’ (Dewey 235). This underscores the power of the historian – by seeking out facts and creating narratives about
those facts, societies have a process by which the individuals within that society might reflect on what sort of society
it is and what sort of society they wish to live in.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is knowledge in other AOKs as important to know as it might be in history or politics?
ACTIVITY
There are often stories of journalists being harassed or targeted for the stories that they are trying to
cover. Find such an article in a newspaper or online and research the story.
1 What facts is the journalist attempting to record?
2 How important do you think those facts are for future historians?
3 What do you think the impact of losing those facts might be?
4 What do you think are the motives and goals of trying to censor those facts?
ACTIVITY
Use the QR code to watch Singapore’s National Day 2019 official video for the theme song ‘Our
Singapore’.
Look for the ways in which the song, its lyrics and the images bring to mind the common understanding
of Singapore’s own history in the minds of its people.
1 What do you think the main goal of the video is? Is it simply a catchy tune or does it seek to do
something more?
2 What role do the references to the country’s past play and how does this link to the messages about
Singapore’s future?
Using the Singapore 2019 National Day theme song as an example, we can see how a common view of history can
serve as a cultural glue which binds the community together. Singapore is still a relatively young country, having
established its independence from Malaysia in 1965. It was previously part of the British Empire, and members of
the ‘Pioneer’ generation (those who were alive during the transition to independence) are still alive and well.
Maintaining a common vision of the struggles and difficulties of forging a new, modern and multicultural country
out of the post-Second World War destruction and chaos has become central to Singapore’s vision of itself. The
National Day video makes this clear in its imagery (the black and white opening, the inclusion of a diverse range of
people, but all clothed in the national colours) and lyrics (which remind listeners of the struggles, the goals and the
successes they’ve enjoyed: ‘And now we look around us and we see / A nation built with love for you and me / a
land to treasure right down to the core / Our Home, Our Heart, Our Singapore) (National Day Parade 2019 Theme
Song – Our Singapore).
This role of a shared view of a community’s history is not to suggest that there is anything false about that view.
Historians create their narratives from the facts they are able to identify and interpret, but sometimes that
interpretation is aimed at providing emotional connections between individuals in a way that unites them. The
Singaporean song doesn’t necessarily offer facts, but a common vision about the nation’s history, and serves to
remind the community of how to view those facts.
Sometimes the historical facts themselves can serve as a binding agent to a community. In her 2017 book Why I’m
no longer talking to White People About Race, Reni Eddo-Lodge opens with a long and detailed account of the
historical facts about the black community in the UK. These facts are highly selective, but consciously so; she is
aiming to tell a very particular story, which as we’ve seen is a common feature for historians. The book is not itself a
‘history’, but the historical survey in her opening chapters provide a common framework composed of statistical and
cultural facts which remind the reader that this is what has been happening to the black community.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Do other AOKs provide a cultural narrative in the same way or in similar ways as history? If history tells
What we are suggesting here is that a community’s history, told honestly but in a particular context, can take on a
different role than simply interpreting what has happened in the past. Furthermore, this speaks to the power of
history. History can take on a mythological status and by ‘myth’ we do not mean ‘false stories’. In Chapter 5 (pages
169–172) we discussed one feature of myth as providing a community with a common narrative that both reminds
the individuals of that community of who they are, but also provides a set of values that are common to the
community. History can serve this function too. The linking of history to the concept of myth is to highlight the role
that a shared understanding of a community’s history can play in providing a set of values and goals for individuals
by which they can orient themselves and help them find their place. These values and goals, developed through a
shared understanding of its history, can provide a community with strong ethical values and guidance.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can knowledge from other AOKs influence a group’s identity as much as historical knowledge might?
CASE STUDY
The Donner Party
Another example of how history can take on a mythical status might be the tale of the ill-fated Donner
Party. In 1846, a group of settlers set out for California from the midwestern United States. They were
trapped by severe weather in the mountains of eastern California and were forced to spend nearly four
months of the winter snowbound with little food or other supplies. Of nearly 90 settlers, only 48 survived
the winter, and some survived only because they had resorted to cannibalism.
While a clearly documented historical event, the history of the Donner Party did more than just teach
generations of young Californians about the state’s history. It highlighted a number of key values and
beliefs that Americans were meant to exhibit: a sense of adventure, a struggle for individual merit,
perseverance, commitment to the group, the inherent significance and value of struggle and an almost
sacred regard held for the settlers of the west. In other words, the teaching of historical fact managed to
take on a mythical dimension: Californian school children weren’t taught this just for the sake of it, they
were taught this to help guide them in life – it gave them an identity.
In the context of other stories of early US colonization and westward expansion, American school
children developed an approach and identity which is in some ways quite different than other countries
around the world. This regard for the settling of the west for many is at the expense of other stories from
the Indigenous people who already lived in the area. Their stories are often simply not taught because
they cast quite a different light on the stories of the American settlers.
Historians then, in their choices of content and emphasis also make value judgments. They therefore
have something of an ethical obligation to reflect on the narratives they choose and to consider the
consequences of their selections.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
With today’s globally mobile world there has arisen a new group of people some call ‘Third Culture Kids’. These
are young people who don’t ‘fit’ into any one culture, but often have lived in many different places and sometimes
have parents from two different cultures. The challenge for young people like this is that they don’t have deep
connections to any one community’s history, so they find it difficult to identify with any one cultural or historical
narrative. This underscores the point we are making here: that deep connections with and acceptance of a
community’s history provide a sense of identity and grounding which helps individuals fix themselves in an ever-
changing and multicultural world. Having such a connection certainly isn’t inherently better than not but does
emphasize one role that knowledge of history provides.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Values
Human values are developed in a variety of ways and the point here is that a shared understanding of
the history of your community (or communities) can provide another source for them. These histories
embody the knowledge of a community, but it is a sort of knowledge or a way of knowing that is never
meant to have the same status of unambiguous scientific description. We don’t tend to develop
communities around facts pertaining to the velocity of objects sliding down a frictionless plane, or
‘identify’ with the respiration rate of algae in ponds, or the varying rate of exchange between currencies.
However, individuals do use historical facts about, for example, the treatment of minorities, to develop
their view of who they are, or use historical facts about the process of imperialism to develop their
values.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do other AOKs influence culture as much as historical knowledge does?
ACTIVITY
Review your school’s history curriculum. Keeping in mind that no history curriculum can ever cover ‘all’
of history (ie, it has to make choices and be selective), note what choices the curriculum developers
(whether it be your teachers or an exam board like the IB) have made and reflect on those choices.
1 Are the curriculum developers prioritizing certain facts over others?
2 Are there particular values being emphasized over others?
3 What types of individuals, events or trends are being focused on?
4 Now consider what facts or elements are not being expressed. How would a student of history think
differently about the past were those facts offered instead of others?
5 What might this suggest about the non-conscious messages offered by the selection of material to
present in history?
Learner profile
Inquirers
How has your school’s history curriculum contributed to your identity?
That a school history curriculum can impact one’s general perspective on the world is well illustrated by a
controversy that arose when the College Board exam board altered their Advanced Placement US History
curriculum in 2015. The College Board suggested the new curriculum provided a ‘clearer and more balanced
approach to the teaching of American history’ with ‘statements that are clearer and more historically precise, and
less open to interpretation or perceptions of imbalance’ (‘The 2015 AP US History Course and Exam Description’).
Nevertheless, when it was published, many politically conservative writers suggested that the curriculum maintains
an ‘underlying bias’ to politically liberal values, citing the following example:
… it variously downplays, omits, and distorts the significance of the assimilationist ethos in American
history. Instead of conveying the nature and importance of assimilation, the College Board projects a
contemporary multiculturalist perspective onto earlier eras. This does an injustice both to the facts and to a
theme that rightly serves as a foundation for successful civic education: assimilation. (Fonte and Kurtz)
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Do the curriculum choices made in other AOKs matter as much as they might in history? Consider the
choices your own school has made in the curriculum being offered in the sciences, or the arts or
mathematics. What choices were available in developing the topics being taught? Do the choices made
matter in the same way as they might in history?
In relation to previous versions of the curriculum, one local school board member suggested that history materials
‘should promote citizenship, patriotism, essentials and benefits of the free enterprise system, respect for authority
and respect for individual rights. Materials should not encourage or condone civil disorder, social strife or disregard
of the law’, which they felt were over-emphasized in the content on the civil unrest of the civil rights movement
(Ganim). This brings out explicitly the fact that the very teaching of history can support wider ideological and
political agendas, providing a framework for communal values by which we might live, and again underscores the
ethical obligation historians have to reflect on the consequences of the choices and selections that they make.
ACTIVITY
1 What do you think Simon Schama means by this quotation? Can you think of an example of work that
you’ve done in a history class, or from your own learning, that might be dangerous to ‘the powerful’?
2 How might the work of this Theory of Knowledge course provide you with an awareness or skills which
might be ‘dangerous’ to those in power?
What does this discussion suggest about the nature of history as an AOK? Not only do historians make choices
about what topics they wish to write about and select among the evidence they wish to use, but the curriculum
developers themselves also must make choices about what sorts of historical facts to teach you and what sort of
context to place them in. These choices are all part of a wider perspective and they form a picture that is far from a
neutral list of facts. The histories we learn and teach to those in our community provide a framework for developing
the values of that community and an orientation for what those individuals will consider important or significant.
The challenge is to develop this framework justly, that is, in a way that is the result of critical reflection and
awareness of the impact on individuals in that community.
Learner profile
Communicators
How and what does art communicate to an audience?
ACTIVITY
1 Put each of the objects shown in the photographs into one of two categories: ‘art’ and ‘not art’. Each
object must go into one or the other of the two categories, but not both. Be sure that you can explain
your reasoning when you are done – what feature or features did you use to differentiate between
things which are art and things which are not art? For the purposes of this activity, consider the object
in each photograph, not the photographs themselves. If the photograph is of a painting, you must
consider the painting, rather than the objects in the painting.
2 Compare your two lists with those of some of your classmates. Share the decision you made about
how to differentiate between things that are art and things that are not art.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Are the arts best seen as a system of knowledge, a type of knowledge or a means of expressing
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
knowledge?
In trying to determine which kinds of things do belong in the category called ‘art’ and which do not, we have to
figure out what particular characteristics define art and differentiate it from other things. One feature that we often
associate with art is beauty. If, however, we try to categorize the objects above into ‘art’ and ‘not-art’ based on
whether they are beautiful or not, then we have two problems: first, we would have to include the cat, and possibly
the tree, as both can be seen to be beautiful. Trying to categorize a cat or a tree as art is problematic because they are
not things which are created by humans. The word ‘art’ is related to the word ‘artificial’, which is a word for things
which are not natural – not part of nature – but which are created by humans. Dating back to the fourteenth century,
the word ‘artificial’, in both the Old French and Latin referred to things which ‘belonged to art’ (‘Artificial’). Given
the idea that only objects which are artificial, or created by humans, belong in the category of art, we can eliminate
the cat and the tree from the set above. We are still left with the question of whether beauty can be the determining
factor.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Subjectivity
What makes the use of ‘beauty’ as a differentiating factor problematic is that beauty is a highly subjective
concept, and all 12 of the objects on page 403 could be seen as beautiful by different people. Perhaps
the lawnmower or the child’s painting might be the two objects which people might find difficult to call
‘beautiful’. However, many people do find machines to be beautiful – a fact which is easier to see with
the classic car, which has been restored to a gleaming treasure from the past. The lawnmower is also in
pristine condition, shiny and new. It has a pleasing colour combination of black and orange. It also has
what we might call sleek lines. The child’s painting is not ‘beautiful’ in the strict sense of being visually
attractive, but we can easily understand that to the parents of the child, the painting would naturally be
beautiful as a reflection of their child’s vision of the world.
The subjectivity of the concept of beauty means that ‘beauty’ cannot be used as a defining characteristic
when we are trying to figure out how to tell whether something is art or whether it is not.
Another problem with trying to use the concept of beauty as a determining factor for deciding whether something is
art or not is that we can also think of many objects which would be classified as art, but which are not physically
beautiful. Consider this painting by Georges Braque, called The Portuguese (1911).
The painting is in the Cubist school. Cubism is a style which was developed by Pablo Picasso and Georges Braque.
The focus is on flattening out objects so that the three-dimensional world is displayed in two dimensions. The image
is not traditionally beautiful, and, although it is more than 100 years old, it is still considered to be one of Braque’s
masterpieces. It is in the collection of the Kunstmuseum in Basel, Switzerland.
ACTIVITY
Do some research and find some recognized artworks in a variety of genres – including dance, poetry,
and sculpture – which are not traditionally beautiful.
1 When were these works of art created? Are they all modern?
2 Can you find some art which is not traditionally beautiful from any time prior to 1900?
3 How do you know that these artworks are examples of art?
We have now made some progress in defining art: we know that art is something which is created by humans and
that beauty, because it is too subjective, is not a defining characteristic. Where do we go from here?
In his essay ‘What is Art and If We Know What Art Is, What Is Politics?’, Tom Robbins defines art as that which
has been created for the express purpose of appealing to our sensory receptors (Robbins 200):
That is not to say that a work of art can’t convey other, additional values, values with intellectual and/or
emotional heft. However, if it’s really art, then those values will play a secondary role. To be sure, we may
praise a piece for its cultural insights, for the progressive statement it makes and the courageous stand it
takes, but to honor it as ‘art’ when its aesthetic impact is not its dominant feature is to fall into a philistine
trap of shoddy semantics and false emphasis. (Robbins 199)
Art exists, in other words, primarily, if not exclusively, for the sake of our desire to share our perceptual experiences
with each other, to find out how the world seems to be to other people, and to determine whether what we
experience is like what others experience or whether it is different. The work of art is the medium for this
communication, and the perceptions it endeavours to convey are hard to pin down in direct, assertive statements.
Try, for example, to explain exactly how it feels to be absolutely thrilled to have achieved some goal – winning a
race, or scoring the highest possible mark on an important test, or receiving a gift of something that you really
wanted but did not expect to get. To use direct statements – such as ‘I was absolutely thrilled!’ – does not convey the
intensity or the nuance of the feelings. The reader of that statement will know, intellectually, that you were happy,
because you said so, but he or she will not experience that moment perceptually. The best way to ensure that the
audience of a work of art experiences the feeling is for you, as artist, to provide an image or scenario or a metaphor
or some other indirect means by which the audience will be able to experience vicariously (indirectly) some of the
same happiness that you experienced.
One way to describe this kind of feeling is to say that art appeals to the aesthetic. ‘Aesthetic’ is a somewhat difficult
concept. Most dictionaries will tell you that ‘aesthetic’ refers to things of great beauty, but as we have already seen,
beauty is not a good standard for determining whether something is art or not – although many works of art are, of
course, very beautiful! ‘Aesthetic’ is therefore not a very good adjective to describe the experience of engaging with
art. A more nuanced definition of ‘aesthetics’, however, is that it is our ability to appreciate a work of art – or any
object (Mastin), which includes our ability to judge whether it is beautiful or not.
Beauty is truth, truth beauty …
John Keats
We can also expand our understanding of what ‘beauty’ means. In his poem ‘Ode on a Grecian Urn’, John Keats
famously said, ‘Beauty is truth, truth beauty …’ That line gives us the insight that beauty does not have to be
physical. We can experience a work of art which is not physically attractive and find in it something that we can
connect to. That connection might be a revelation about human experience, insight into a mind which is like ours or
which we can admire, or a truth about life. We can, therefore, find that work of art beautiful because of that
connection. We can appreciate art, in other words, for many different reasons, not all of which have to do with the
degree to which it is attractive to look at or listen to.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
A sense of the aesthetic is important in the arts. Does it have the same kind of importance for knowledge
generation in any other areas of knowledge such as mathematics or history?
We will take, then, Robbins’ idea that art is that which exists primarily or solely for the purpose of fulfilling our
aesthetic needs as our definition of art. Given that definition, we can see that some of the 12 objects in the photo
collection at the start of this chapter are quite different from the others, in that they serve functional purposes. Table
12.1 shows how we can consider all 12 of the objects in terms of their utility.
ACTIVITY
Speak to your classmates. Do you agree with this definition of what constitutes art? If not, how would
you define it? The ability to define what is and what is not art is important because until we can know
what art is, we can’t know what kind of knowledge we get from it.
So far, this categorization seems clear, but some of the items don’t seem to sit easily in their columns. We can make
an argument that the Sydney Opera House, the wedding clothes and the religious statue of Buddha were all created
for a functional purpose. However, all of them also feature artistic elements not needed in order to make them
function as they are intended to.
The purpose of building an opera house is so that it can be used for the staging of operas. The Sydney Opera House
hosts a wide variety of events including plays, dance, symphonies, musical theatre and films. The opera house does,
however, certainly have architectural features which go well beyond the simply functional. Sydney could have
decided on a design for an opera house which was quite plain, so long as the acoustics inside were effective for
music and the theatre was large enough to accommodate an audience. Instead, they chose a design which:
‘was inspired by nature, its forms, functions and colours. The designer, Danish architect Jørn Utzon, was
influenced in his designs by bird wings, the shape and form of clouds, shells, walnuts and palm trees. He
looked upon nature for guidance when designing, as nature over time combined both efficiency and
beauty, hand in hand’. (Ryan)
Many people think that the opera house looks like billowing sails on boats, an effect which is emphasized because of
the position of the building out on a point in Sydney Harbour.
It is, of course, the shell design of the roof which makes the opera house so striking and memorable. Not only was
that design not necessary for the opera house to function as intended, it also posed a huge problem for construction.
Engineers struggled for years trying to figure out how to construct the shells. It was Utzon himself who finally
worked it out, and the solution was revolutionary in architecture (Sydney Opera House). He claimed that his solution
was inspired by peeling an orange. If combined, all 14 of the separate roofs would form a sphere (Ryan). This
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
design, and the successful implementation of it, reveal that the builders of the Sydney Opera House cared about
more than simple functionality, and its recognition, in 2007, as a UNESCO World Heritage Site suggests that people
around the world appreciate the building for more than its function as well.
The wedding clothes are designed to be worn during a Hindu wedding ceremony. They are functional in the same
way that all clothing is functional, to help preserve people’s dignity and privacy and to keep them warm and safe
from the elements. They have also been designed with features which are intended to make the clothing especially
suited to the particular occasion and to ensure that it reflects long-held cultural traditions. The bride’s gown is called
a lehenga and it is very often red, because red is a symbol of happiness and good luck. The groom wears a tunic,
called a sherwani, over trousers, called churidas. The turban is called a Safa, and the brooch on the turban is a Kalgi,
and symbolizes respect (‘Today’s Bride’). The clothing helps to create the traditional ceremony which then connects
the bride and groom to the long history of brides and grooms which came before them. It is also beautiful and helps
to make the bride and groom the center of attention on an occasion that they will never forget. Wedding clothing in
many cultures performs the same function, and it is generally never worn again. The money and effort spent in
creating and acquiring wedding clothes reflects people’s value for those clothes beyond the merely useful.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the relationship between functionality and the aesthetic feature in any other AOK as part of its
scope, or as part of any other aspect of the AOK?
The statue of the buddha is the Phuket Big Buddha in Thailand. It was granted the name of Phra Phutta Ming
Mongkol Akenakakiri by the Supreme Patriarch of Thailand in 2008. The name means ‘Happiness on Top of
Nagakerd Mountain’ (Limrudee). The statue was built because some friends were hiking through the Nagakerd Hills
and came upon the mountain top, which has spectacular views in every direction. It was a perfect viewpoint, and as
time passed, they thought it would make a perfect place for a statue of the Lord Buddha (‘Phuket Big Buddha’). The
purpose for creating the Buddha, then, was reverence – to celebrate the Lord Buddha in an exceptionally beautiful
natural site. The large statue is also dedicated to King Bhumibol, and so the site functions also to express respect and
admiration for the king. Finally, it has become an important tourist destination in Thailand, with as many as 1000
visitors a day (‘Phuket Big Buddha’). Visitors to the site can pay a fee to leave messages in memory of loved ones
who have passed away. The Buddha has been designed with an artistic ideal in mind. It is made out of concrete and
then layered with Burmese white jade marble to reflect the light.
All three of those objects – the Sydney Opera House, the Indian wedding clothes and the Phuket Big Buddha –
feature strikingly artistic characteristics, but all of them have specific functions other than the aesthetic. One is a
place for entertainment, one provides physical protection and symbolic significance during a ceremony and one is
the object of reverence. In Table 12.1, we have put the first two in the middle column based on the idea that the
practical functionality of the object is greater than the artistic function, while we put the Buddha in the last column,
based on the idea that reverence is an aesthetic experience, and so the functionality of that work of art is mostly, if
not entirely, aesthetic.
TOK trap
It can be tempting, when writing about the arts for your TOK essay, to claim that everything is art if you
want it to be art. Such an overly-simplified claim is likely to lead to weak arguments. You will do much
better if you can make a more sophisticated argument based on a clear definition of what makes
something art. We have offered one here: art is that which functions only as art.
We have seen that, while many objects can easily be classified as either art or not art using that
definition, some objects are still more difficult to classify. Remember, when you are classifying things
according to a particular definition, there are no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ answers; instead, your job is to define
your category and then justify your choices as to what belongs in the category.
Perhaps you would prefer to categorize the Sydney Opera House as art because of its extraordinary
architecture, or perhaps you would prefer to classify the Phuket Big Buddha as functional because of the
tourist industry it has inspired. You must present in detail the thinking which justifies your decision. The
most sophisticated answers will demonstrate your understanding of the reasons that the classification is
a problem by pointing out the tension between the characteristics that would seem to make the object art
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
and the characteristics which would seem to make it a functional object.
ACTIVITY
After you have completed this activity you can check your answers by using the first QR code.
Now that you have read the discussion about how to define a work of art, classify each of the following
things in terms of whether it does or does not fit the definition of art. Be sure to explain your reasoning.
• Advertising jingle (use the second QR code).
• T-Mobile dance (use the third QR code) – consider the dance itself and the video of the dance.
• Totem pole – consider the totem pole itself and the photograph of the totem pole. You may need to do
a little research on the role of totem poles in Native American societies such as the Alaskan Tlinget
people.
• Concept graphic – animals in clothes.
One final observation is that we have been considering here the question of what art is. The question of whether
something is good art is a separate question altogether. We will consider that question in the Perspectives section
later in this chapter.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is the question of what constitutes the scope of any other area of knowledge contentious in the same
way that it can be contentious in the arts? Why or why not?
We have seen in Chapters 8 to 11, that mathematics, the natural sciences, the human sciences and history each have
a particular content focus, a particular aspect of the world and human experience which the practitioners of those
areas of knowledge try to understand. In natural science, for example, the focus is on physical characteristics of the
Universe, while in history, the focus is on the facts and connections among events which have happened in the past.
The scope of each of those areas helps to shape the nature of the inquiry and the methods that practitioners use in
order to make knowledge in those areas.
When we come to consider the scope of the arts, however, it is harder to identify a particular segment of the
Universe or of human experience on which the arts focus. Table 12.2 lists some works of art and their subjects – the
content on which the artworks focus. Use the QR codes to find out more about each work:
Novel: The Handmaid’s Tale by Margaret Imaginary dystopian society in which there are only a few
Atwood (Canada 1985) fertile women and they must serve wealthy men, whose
wives cannot bear children
Poem: ‘The Cat’s Song’ by Marge Piercy Cats and the relationship between cats and people
(USA 1992)
Painting: The Roll Call by Elizabeth Soldiers after a battle in the Crimean War
Southerden Butler (England 1874)
Painting: Lady with an Ermine by Portrait of the mistress of an Italian Duke; an animal
Leonardo da Vinci (Italy 1489–90)
Sculpture: The Thinker by Auguste Rodin Human form, representation of what it’s like to think deeply
(France 1880)
Opera: Rinaldo by George Frederic Christian crusade of 1099; battles, love affairs, an
Handel (England 1711) enchanted palace and spirits
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
The scope of the arts ranges through many of the other AOKs. Does the same thing happen in history or
the human sciences?
This very small collection of ten artworks in eight different media from eight different countries and four different
centuries shows us that the subjects of artworks range across many different topics and experiences. This little
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
collection includes art about war, religion, mathematics, human relationships, insects, politics, human psychology
and cats.
ACTIVITY
1 Looking at the list of artworks in Table 12.2, could the subject of all of those be explored in other
genres? Could, for example, an exploration of mathematics such as the one that Wislawa Szymborska
did in her poem ‘Pi’ be done in music or sculpture?
2 Are there some subjects which can only be explored through a particular kind of art?
ACTIVITY
Can you think of any object, experience, emotion or other element of our internal and external
experience which an artist could not use as an inspiration for a work of art?
Artists make art about things that they observe and things that they experience. The movie American Beauty features
an artist, a young moviemaker, who makes a film of a plastic bag blowing in the wind. He describes his observation
as the ‘the most beautiful thing I ever filmed’ and says it is the moment at which he realized that ‘… there was this
entire life behind things, and this incredibly benevolent force that wanted me to know there was no reason to be
afraid’ (American Beauty). The scope of art, it would seem, then, includes anything that it is possible for an artist to
observe or experience.
Artists pursue art because of their unique personal desire and ability to produce art. But people who do not
themselves create art can also be seen to pursue engagement with the arts as part of fulfilling their own unique
potential. The arts stimulate the intellect, the imagination and the emotions, and many people find that complex
response to be exciting, energizing and fulfilling. Although the arts are not necessary for what Maslow identified as
being the most basic needs for survival – biological and physiological needs and safety needs – we can see how
much time, money and effort is expended in pursuit of artistic experience. Let’s consider music as an example.
Learner profile
Reflective
How do both artists and audiences use art to help them reflect on their lives and beliefs?
As reflected by the amount of money they spend on it, fans in North America and the United Kingdom appear to
place a high value on live music. In 2015, music fans in the UK spent more than £2 billion (approximately US $3.1
billion) on concerts and music festivals (Sayid). Concert ticket revenues in the US and Canada have risen from
approximately $1 billion in 1996 to $8 billion in 2017 (Watson 2018). A Taylor Swift tour in North America earned
$277 million in 2018 (Watson 2019). In Canada, more than half of all music spending in 2016 was for live music
events (IQ Live Music Intelligence). In 2019, English songwriter Ed Sheeran’s Divide tour broke the all-time record
for earnings on a music tour, making a total of $776.2 million. More than 8.5 million people saw him perform,
across 258 shows (nypapers.com).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the amount of money spent in the arts relate to the knowledge which is made in the arts in the
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
same way that the amount of money spent in the sciences does? Why or why not?
In Japan, music also generates tremendous revenues, but in that country, most of the money spent is on physical
media – CDs and vinyl. There are 6000 music stores in Japan, as opposed to only about 1900 in the United States,
and only 700 in Germany, which has the third-largest number in the world. Nearly 80 per cent of music sales in
Japan are for physical media; in 2016, Japanese music consumers purchased approximately ¥254 billion ($2.44
billion) worth of music a year – most of it in the form of CDs (Looi). This makes the Japanese music market the
second biggest in the world, after the US.
In Brazil, music streaming services have brought Brazil back to the top ten in music expenditure, after a decade of
decline (Darlington). In that country, 70 per cent of music sales goes to streaming services.
ACTIVITY
1 Do you think that the amount of money spent on music and musical experiences is a good indicator of
the importance of music in our lives?
2 What do you think accounts for people’s desire for engagement with music?
3 Do you and your friends spend a significant amount of time and/or money on music or other art
forms? What do you personally get from your engagement with the arts?
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Culture
One important aspect of the scope of art is that it is a reflection of culture. The kind of art which is
created and loved reflects the features and values of the culture in which it is created. Art very often
plays an important role in cultural rituals such as weddings, festivals, holidays, religious services and
other cultural ceremonies. Art can also become a historical record of events that occurred in a particular
culture. In 1941, painter Jacob Lawrence, for example, painted a series of 60 paintings which illustrate
the experience of what was known in the United States as the Great Migration – the moving of a million
African Americans from the deep south to the industrial north after the start of the First World War. Use
the QR code to view the series. Be sure to hover your cursor over the introduction to read about the
collection.
South African playwright Athol Fugard wrote a play in 1982 called ‘Master Harold’… and the boys which
is set in South Africa during apartheid. Apartheid was a legal system of racial separation which lasted
from 1948 to 1994, and by which the majority population of black Africans was controlled economically
and physically by the minority white population, descended from the seventeenth-century Dutch settlers.
The play has a very strong personal focus: it explores deeply the effect of this inherited power on 16-
year-old Hally – on his judgment, his emotions and his best relationships – but it also serves as a
powerful condemnation of the institution of apartheid and provides viewers with a rich insight into what it
was like to live with those restrictions.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can art change the way we interpret the world?
Artists aim to share their worldview and to shape the worldviews of others. In the Methods and tools section, we
will explore in more detail how this happens. For now, we can just consider that a work of art is the product of an
artist – or, in some cases, a group of artists. That product is shaped by the artist’s personal experiences and
worldview, and by their values, beliefs, ideals, and hopes. Some kinds of art convey a message, an idea which can
be put into words. Other works of art create a feeling which is harder to put into words.
Use the QR code to listen to poet Clint Smith perform his poem ‘A letter to five of the presidents who owned slaves
while they were in office’. The text of the poem is also on the webpage. This work of art has a specific purpose: it
challenges the version of US history which has been taught to children for the past 200 years. Smith explains his
view of his purpose at the end of the performance when he says, ‘And this is my Brief But Spectacular take on
complicating the history of the United States’ (PBS NewsHour). In the poem, we can see how the poet’s own life
experience has shaped his ideas about the history of the United States and how it is badly taught and how it ought to
be taught better. We can consider this poem in terms of what the author intended for us to think about and even,
possibly, in terms of what he would like his audience to do as a result of reading or listening to his poem.
Not all art has such a clear purpose, however. Consider the photograph below.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Interpretation is an important concept in the process of making knowledge in the arts; how does
interpretation function similarly and differently in history and the natural sciences?
Danish-Icelandic artist Olafur Eliasson describes the importance of art in an article entitled ‘Why art has the power
to change the world’. He contrasts the effect of art on viewers with the effect of a lot of data and statistics. He
suggests that statistics and data can overwhelm us, making us less able to process what is happing around the world
– even with regard to big problems like global warming. He says that art, on the other hand, has the capacity to help
us understand the world better:
Giving people access to data most often leaves them feeling overwhelmed and disconnected, not
empowered and poised for action. This is where art can make a difference. Art does not show people what
to do, yet engaging with a good work of art can connect you to your senses, body, and mind. It can make
the worl felt. And this felt feeling may spur thinking, engagement, and even action. (Eliasson)
This description of the power of art is very similar to what we saw with Tom Robbins’ definition of art. Both
suggest that one kind of knowledge that we can get from art, in other words, is visceral, a sensual understanding of
the reality of the world around us. Eliasson says that what artists strive for is to touch the emotions of the audience.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
We often use the term ‘moved’ to describe the effect of something which touched our emotions deeply. Eliasson
suggests that that term can be seen as literal as well as metaphorical: we can be moved to an understanding that we
have not ever had before. Art, he says, is a transformative experience (Eliasson).
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the role of art in making social commentary relate to the kind of social role of natural science that
we saw in Chapter 9?
In 1910, British playwright John Galsworthy wrote a play called Justice, which depicted the cruelty of the penal
system and the effect it had on prisoners who were completely broken down by that system. Home Secretary
Winston Churchill and Sir Evelyn Ruggles-Brise, then Chairman of the Prison Commission, attended the opening
night of the play, and the play influenced their decision to reduce the amount of time prisoners could be made to
spend in solitary confinement (Nellis 61). This event provides us with a rather striking instance of the power of art to
cause social change. Interestingly, though, the changes that resulted from the play occurred because it reached two
influential men. The art gave two individuals insight into a truth about the society in which they lived, and those two
men had the power to make a change. The play did not necessarily have to reach a wide audience or to change the
minds of many people in order for it to have a social effect. Had Churchill and Ruggles-Brise not seen the play,
perhaps no change would have come about, even if many audience members felt empathy for the plight of prisoners.
It is more difficult to come up with examples of artworks which first affected many members of a society who then,
as a result of their exposure to the art, agitated for change and put pressure on those in power to effect those
changes.
That does not, however, mean that art cannot have an effect on a society at large.
CASE STUDY
Hamlet in the Soviet Union
Hamlet is the story of a young man whose father was murdered and whose right to the throne was
usurped by the murderer – his uncle. Hamlet spends the play observing what is going on in the court,
seeing what others apparently either do not see, or do not want to acknowledge. He is also famously
indecisive – trying to figure out what is real and what is right before he acts. In the end, of course, he
overthrows the usurper – although with tragic results all around.
Artists in the Soviet era saw much opportunity in this story to comment, subtly, on the authoritarian rule
in the Soviet Union. Boris Pasternak, who translated most of Shakespeare’s work into Russian, saw
Hamlet as a Christ figure. His translation emphasizes Hamlet as the person who challenged those in
power, and his assassination as a politically motivated murder which made Hamlet a martyr (Conroy 25).
Stage productions could be understood to be equating Stalin with Claudius, usurping Lenin’s role and
eliminating rivals such as Leon Trotsky (Sillito). Audiences could attend performances of Hamlet and see
in them their own feelings about the oppressive government, sharing their fears and frustrations silently,
without having to risk saying anything publicly which could bring down retribution. There was a long
history of this kind of communication between authors, directors, performers and audiences, known as
‘Aesopian language’ in Russia. ‘Aesopian language’ is the use of allegory, allusion or satire as a means
of avoiding direct social criticism (Carmeli).
Hamlet did not cause any social change in the Soviet Union, but Stalin was uncomfortable enough with it
that he caused it to be banned in a de facto way, if not formally. Perhaps he was afraid that it might
have the power to influence people to rise up against his rule. Although it did not lead to a revolution, the
play did help people to form a bond of shared experience. In the years after Stalin’s death, the near
universal love of Shakespeare’s work and Hamlet in particular could be seen in the many productions,
as mentioned previously, but also in people’s names.
In Armenia, many people have the first name Shakespeare. A famous Armenian football player is named
Henrikh Hamlet Mkhitaryan. In Lithuania, rock star Andrius Mamontovas played Hamlet from 1996 until
at least 2012 (Sillito). Shakespeare’s work is beloved throughout the former Soviet Union. In part,
Stalin’s failure to ban it outright sent a message to the people that Shakespeare could not be banned –
he was bigger than Stalin, a symbol of freedom. That love continues today.
The question remains: can art ever change the world through a sort of mass movement in response to an artwork? Or
is art inherently personal, changing minds one at a time? At the very least, we can see that art can serve as a cultural
icon, and the knowledge it can give people in a whole society is the knowledge that there is always hope.
EE links
The exploration of the function of artists in the Soviet Union could be a good research study for an
We have seen, now, that the scope of the arts is both broad and deep. Art can take many different forms, and it can
encompass any subject. It serves both cultural and historical purposes, and it plays a significant role in helping
people achieve emotional and psychological health. In the next section, we will consider different perspectives on
art, in terms of what counts as art and what counts as good art, as well as in terms of what individual works of art
mean.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Is knowledge in the arts useful in the same way that knowledge in the sciences or mathematics can be
seen to be useful?
Is the role that having or not having background knowledge plays in making knowledge in history similar
to or different from the role it plays in the arts? Why?
As an example of how this dynamic results in knowledge, let’s take a look at a poem by WD Snodgrass: ‘Returned
to Frisco, 1946’.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How does this relationship between art, artist and audience contrast to the relationship of the general
public to scientists and scientific knowledge or mathematicians and mathematics?
For someone who did actually grow up in San Francisco, however, there is a problem with this interpretation. San
Franciscans do not call San Francisco ‘Frisco’. To them ‘Frisco’ is an insult. This poem was published in 1957, and
in those days, when you wanted to call someone and didn’t know the number, there was no internet to use as a
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
resource. You dialed 411, which was the number for directory assistance, and a live operator looked the number up
for you. If, in those days, you called 411 and asked for a number in Frisco, the operators, perfectly seriously, gave
you the area code for Frisco, Texas. San Franciscans did not have a sense of humour about – or a lot of patience for
– people calling their city ‘Frisco’.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can a work of art have meaning of which the artist themselves is unaware?
You may very well not have known that about San Francisco before you read that last paragraph. For you, then, as a
reader of ‘Returned to Frisco’, an interpretation of a soldier from that city being returned there after the war would
make good sense and would be a valid interpretation that took into account the words of the poem. Now, however,
you have new knowledge. You are, in effect, a new reader of this poem. Now you have to work out what to do with
the fact that this soldier is being ‘returned’ to a city whose proper name he does not know. Maybe he is not from
there, and when he says he is being returned, he means more generally that he is being returned to the US, and that
‘Frisco’, which is the slang name he knows for it, is the place he happens to be dropped off. Maybe he is from there,
and the use of the term Frisco suggests that the city he is coming back to is not the city he left – or that he returns to
his home a stranger. Possibly you can think of other explanations for why the speaker uses the term ‘Frisco’ in the
title.
What is interesting, though, is that our interpretation of the text based on our knowledge that ‘Frisco’ is a term that
only a non-native of the San Francisco Bay Area would use, does not depend on what Snodgrass meant. Maybe
Snodgrass didn’t know that San Franciscans don’t call it Frisco. Snodgrass himself was born in Pennsylvania, 3000
miles from San Francisco. He served in the Navy, and earned a Masters degree from a university in Iowa. After that,
he lived, and died, in New York (‘WD Snodgrass’). He might not have realized, then, that this city in which he
never lived, would not be called Frisco by locals. Maybe he did know, however, and wanted his readers to wrestle
with that idea of a stranger being sent back – or sent home. We have no way of knowing what Snodgrass actually
knew when he wrote the poem. We can only interpret the poem based on what we know about the meaning and
implications of the words in it. Our interpretation is valid, regardless of what Snodgrass knew. The only way we
might have to call our interpretation invalid would be if we knew that ‘Frisco’ is not the proper name for San
Francisco and then we decided just to ignore that fact and treat ‘Frisco’ as the name that natives would use. That
would be a denial of knowledge, and any interpretation of any artwork based on a denial of knowledge or a willful
refusal to take into account all the facts is a failed interpretation.
ACTIVITY
How has your personal knowledge shaped your understanding of art? Discuss at least three different
examples.
In Shakespeare’s Henry IV Part 1, Lady Percy speaks to her husband, Hotspur, asking him why he has been acting
so strangely. Hotspur is one of a trio of rebels who are plotting to overthrow the king and seize the crown. His wife
is unaware of this plot at this point in the play. Let’s read the speech first, imagining that our perspective as a reader
is a woman whose husband is in the military and is scheduled to go to a conflict zone such as Afghanistan or Iraq
very soon. What would most strike such a reader? How would she interpret the implications of Lady Percy’s
speech?
Table 12.3 Links between the language in Shakespeare’s Henry IV Part 1 and symptoms of PTSD
Line Language Medical term
1 ‘… why are you thus Social withdrawal and isolation
alone?’
4–5 ‘… what is’t that takes Somatic disturbances; loss of ability to experience pleasure. (‘Somatic’ is
from thee/Thy an adjective that relates to sleep. The phrase ‘somatic disturbances’
stomach, pleasure’ means that Hotspur’s sleep is restless and interrupted. A few lines later,
we find that he also sometimes suffers from insomnia – he can’t sleep at
all)
8 ‘Why has thou lost the Peripheral vasoconstriction (‘Peripheral vasoconstriction’ means that the
fresh blood in thy blood vessels are constricted and so not sending blood normally to
cheeks?’ Hotspur’s face)
22– ‘That beads of sweat Night sweats
23 have stood upon thy
brow/Like bubbles in a
late-disturbed stream
…’
Shay identifies several more descriptions in the speech which align with what, today, we know as symptoms of
PTSD.
Several points can be made about differing perspectives with regard to this example from Henry IV Part 1. Firstly,
we have seen how the life experiences of two very different readers would shape the understanding that those
readers might have of this speech. Both readers took the text as it is, but they thought differently about what was
important. One thought about the speech from the perspective of its speaker, Lady Percy, while the other thought
about the speech from the perspective of the man it describes: Hotspur. Both of those interpretations are rational and
reasonable.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
How does this artistic knowledge of PTSD compare and contrast with the knowledge of PTSD that has
been made by natural and human scientists? Is this artistic knowledge the same as knowledge a
historian might make?
Secondly, we have taken the trouble to consider the speech from two different perspectives. We have therefore
gained a more complex understanding of the meaning of the speech than we would have been likely to get had we
considered only one perspective – or if our own perspective, being different from either of the two we considered
here, led us to see the speech in yet another way. This shows us that having different perspectives on a work of art
can increase our understanding and appreciation of the richness of that art – and can increase the knowledge that we
gain from it.
Thirdly, what we have understood from the speech is not likely to match exactly what Shakespeare intended when
he wrote it. For one thing, Shakespeare, of course, could never have heard of post-traumatic stress disorder. In fact,
the psychological sense did not come into use until 1955 (Etymonline). We can, however, consider that we share
ACTIVITY
After you have completed this activity you can check your answers by using the QR code.
Examine the photograph of the pomegranates. Make a list of the details that you notice.
1 What do you think these details suggest in terms of the meaning of the image?
2 Do you think there is a meaning of the sort which you could explain in words, or is the image one
which can better be understood just as a sensory experience?
Once you have answered these questions, use the QR code to carry out some research on the different
symbolic significances of the pomegranate. Then come back and answer the questions again.
We have considered how the background experience and knowledge of the different audience members for a work
of art affect the kind of knowledge that each person can get from it. In the next section, we will be looking at the
methods and tools that are used to create and interpret art. One important tool that every person engaging with art
has for developing knowledge from that work of art is their personal knowledge and experience. As your knowledge
and experience continue to change and grow over the course of your life, you will find that your understanding of
many works of art will also change and grow. This is one reason that we can revisit the same work of art again and
again over the course of our lives and still enjoy it – a sophisticated work of art allows for new understanding over
time.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is the knowledge made in the arts more open to interpretation than the knowledge made in mathematics
or history? Why or why not?
The reason for the differences in these judgments is that each of those different kinds of audience cares about
different things.
Individual judgments
For individuals, ‘is this a quality piece of art?’ is a question for which opinion is the appropriate and effective means
of determining the answer. If you, as an individual, are moved in some memorable way by a work of art, then you,
individually, will experience it as being of high quality. It doesn’t matter if no one else does; the individual
experience with art is an important one, and your personal judgment is valid because it is personal.
Expert judgments
Experts have a completely different perspective on the kind of art for which they have developed expertise. One
becomes an expert only after long study and many years’ experience with something. Through long exposure,
experts simply learn more about their subject than people who don’t have that kind of exposure possibly can.
Consider this painting, Basket of Fruit, by Italian painter Michelangelo Merisi da Caravaggio (commonly known as
Caravaggio).
Many individuals won’t know much about this painting, or still life paintings in general, and won’t know what to
look for in terms of symbols which might convey meaning. Some people will like it because they find the colours
pleasing or they appreciate the composition of the fruit basket taking up the bottom half of the painting. Maybe
some individuals will like the painting because it makes them appreciate the bounty of nature. There might, of
course, be many other reasons that individuals can appreciate this work of art.
Experts bring a perspective to the appreciation of art which can help us to know more than we can know on our own.
As we saw with the discussion of ‘Returned to Frisco, 1946’ and the speech from Henry IV Part 1, we can gain a
deeper appreciation for the meaning and value of a work of art – our knowledge of any given work can be better – if
we are willing to share ideas and listen to the perspectives of others. Holding doggedly to the idea that ‘it’s only
good art if I like it’ is an attitude which is likely to keep us from expanding our ability to gain all the kinds of
insights into the world which can be gained from engaging with art. There is certainly no reason that you should
allow experts to convince you that the painting your child made for you in their first year in school is not quality art.
That painting has deep emotional significance for you, and always will. But there is equally no good reason that we
should reject the opinions of experts out of hand; they have studied art in ways that we have not, and so they have
perspectives to offer which can help us expand our experience with art.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Who determines what art is valued, and on what criteria?
Should your judgments about art be given the same weight as those of an expert?
CAS links
You could develop a CAS activity by contacting a local art museum and arranging for you and some
ACTIVITY
Many experts go to university in order to become experts in their field, but we all develop a certain
amount of expertise about things we are interested in because we engage with them frequently over a
period of years. You may have already developed some significant expertise with an art form if you have
exposed yourself to it over a long period of time. Think of the music that you like to listen to, for example.
1 Is there a kind of music which you enjoy and appreciate but which your parents or teachers cannot
understand and so think is not of value?
2 What could you explain about that music to help those people without your level of expertise to
understand and appreciate it better?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can we individually develop expertise in other areas of knowledge the way we can in some branches of
the arts, just from personal experience? Why or why not?
Societal judgments
Selections of what objects go into art museums tend to be made by experts who work for the museums. Your child’s
handprint painting is not going to be chosen for such a purpose, and you don’t have the ability to be able to ensure
that their painting ends up in a museum – unless you are wealthy enough to create your own museum without
needing outside funding and without needing visitors to pay entrance fees!
However, a lot of art becomes part of a culture – and part of a cultural heritage – simply by widespread acclaim of
the people in that culture. This art doesn’t necessarily go into museums (though some of it may be in museums), but
it is studied and enjoyed and remembered and, very often, is passed on from generation to generation. These large-
group judgments perpetuate traditional dances and music, for example.
Often these judgments are signaled by the willingness of many people to pay to experience the art. In August 2019,
the Eagles’ Greatest Hits album surpassed Michael Jackson’s album Thriller, as the best-selling album of all time,
with 36 million copies sold (Clark and Lynch). Earlier in the chapter we considered Ed Sheeran’s phenomenal
Divide tour. We can say with confidence that the quality of his art has been attested to by widespread acclaim.
Sometimes that kind of acclaim leads to art being valued over many decades or centuries. The Beatles caused a
sensation when they came to the attention of the international music scene with their first studio contract in 1962,
and their music is still widely loved, although the group had broken up for good by early 1970 – nearly 50 years ago.
At the time of writing this book (2019), the Beatles have sold more than 600 million records, tapes, and CDs
(Hotten) – the greatest number by any group ever. Beethoven’s music is still beloved by millions of people around
the world, although the composer died in 1827, nearly 200 years ago. On the assumption that the reason people pay
for music is that they find it to be of high quality, all these examples show how people from around the world make
a combined judgment about what makes quality art.
ACTIVITY
1 What artworks do you personally consider to be of high quality?
2 What artworks in your community or country have achieved widespread acclaim?
3 Do you agree with the cultural judgment that these are quality works?
4 Which contemporary artists or works of art from your culture do you think are most likely to prove to
transcend time? Why?
Other examples of art which has have valued by widespread popular acclaim are the works of Shakespeare, the
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
street art of Banksy and the ‘Despacito’ music video by Puerto Rican singers Luis Fonsi and Daddy Yankee. It
premiered on YouTube in January 2017, and at the time of writing, has garnered more than 6 billion views, making
it the most-viewed video on the platform (Lacoma and Martindale). While expert judgments may play a role in
promoting these artists, in that individuals may have their attention drawn to the art by experts who help them
understand it, very often love of the particular artwork is passed from individual to individual. Certainly, experts
alone cannot ensure that any given artist or work of art can continue to be seen as quality work for hundreds of
years.
CASE STUDY
Salvator Mundi by Leonardo da Vinci
The most expensive painting ever sold is Salvator Mundi, which has been attributed to Leonardo da
Vinci.
The painting sold at auction in November 2017 for $415.3 million (Jacobs). Amazingly, the same painting
sold in 1958 for only $60 (Weaver). The reason for this incredible change in the value of the painting is
that for centuries it was believed that the painting was by Bernardino Luini, one member of the large
group of artists who worked in da Vinci’s studio (Weaver). In fact, there are fewer than 20 paintings
which have been confirmed to have been painted by da Vinci’s own hand, including the Mona Lisa and
The Last Supper.
The sale price of Salvator Mundi raises an interesting and somewhat thorny question about the value of
art. Certainly, the quality of the painting itself didn’t change between 1958 and 2017, but in that 50-year
period, the experts changed their minds about who painted it. The simple fact that it is now attributed to
da Vinci himself is responsible for the change in value. The judgment that this painting is high quality art
is not an individual judgment. It is the judgment of experts, but it is also a judgment based on societal
agreement. Society – and the market – supports the idea that work by Leonardo da Vinci himself is more
worthy than an equally well-crafted painting by someone else.
ACTIVITY
Earlier in the chapter, we asked you to consider whether there was anything at all which could not be the
subject of a work of art. Now we would like you to consider whether there is anything at all which could
not be used as part of the materials in the creation of a work of art.
A fundamental feature of the arts is that they are creative. They are bounded only by the imaginations of the world’s
artists, which means that the materials and methods used in the creation of art are also bounded only by those very
same imaginations.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How does the role of imagination in the arts compare and contrast to the role of imagination in
mathematics?
One important method for making knowledge in the arts is discussion with other people with different perspectives,
as we have seen in the section above. Just such a discussion was organized by the Tate. You can watch a video of
the discussion by using the QR code here on the right.
If you watch the video, you will see that the meaning the group is finding in the piece is less in the piece itself than
in the reaction it generates. Fountain does seem to have resulted, just in those three minutes, in a lot of ideas about
what art is, about who gets to decide what is good art, and about the difference between personal judgments and the
judgments of experts – many of the ideas that we have explored in this chapter.
ACTIVITY
The Tate museum, which owns one of 12 replicas which Duchamp made in 1964, has on its website a
lengthy article about Fountain. The article discusses the history of the piece, its effect on the art world
and its meaning, and what might be seen in it by the careful viewer.
In this article, you will see that another important method for interpreting art is the careful observation of
the details of the work itself and the consideration of what those details might mean, literally or
symbolically. It turns out that there is a whole history behind the name of the fake artist that Duchamp
Learner profile
Thinkers
Is it fair to say that the arts engage our critical thinking skills as much as they engage our creative
thinking?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is the kind of observation needed to make knowledge about a piece of art more similar to or more
different from the kind of observation necessary in the natural sciences and the human sciences?
Careful observation of the details of a work of art is a second important method for engaging with any artwork, not
just for sculpture. Rap is a form of music which has often generated as much controversy as Fountain does. Many
people will argue that rap is not music – claiming that it is just an excuse to use a lot of profanity. Others say that rap
is just noise. People who know rap music well, however, are able to see the complexities of the music and to
appreciate the talent of the artists for language use, expert use of their voice and a deep understanding of rhythm, all
in addition to the ideas which are expressed in the lyrics. One example of an extremely detailed analysis of a rap
song by Eminem can be found using the QR code on the right.
The analysis reveals the complexity and subtlety of the way the song has been constructed and demonstrates the
kind of close, careful observation that people who don’t like rap have likely not undertaken.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
You have probably had some experience with interpreting literature from your Group A course in Studies in
Language and Literature, and your other literature courses from previous years, so you will know that literature, too,
can be interpreted by close observation of detail. We’ll explore, by way of example, ‘Nothing Gold Can Stay’, by
Robert Frost, a poet from the United States:
If we look closely, we can see a good many literary techniques at work, even in such a short poem. Table 12.4
provides a list of some of them.
Table 12.4 Literary techniques in the poem ‘Nothing Gold Can Stay’ by Robert Frost
Line Literary element
1 Paradox: ‘green is gold’
1 Imagery: nature’s first green is literally gold: if you observe a plant when it just comes out of the
ground, it is yellow. It has not been exposed to sunlight, and sunlight is what is needed for
photosynthesis to take place
1 Metaphor: we often use the word ‘gold’ to indicate something of great value. In this case, valuable
because it is very rare
1–2 Rhyme
3 Paradox: ‘leaf’s a flower’
3 Metaphor: the leaf (which will be green after photosynthesis takes hold) is gold, like a flower is
4 Description: ‘only so an hour’. This is likely also literally true; it probably takes an hour or less for
the sunlight to do its work and the pale golden plant to turn green
3–4 Rhyme
5 Paradox: ‘leaf subsides to leaf’ – if it is already a leaf, how can it sink back into being a leaf? The
answer, of course, is that it is a leaf when it is gold, and then, when it turns green, it sinks back into
being a regular leaf. The implication of ‘subside’ is a sinking back, so that the green is not as
special as the gold
6 Religious allusion to the Garden of Eden; this gives us something to think about, because we don’t
necessarily think of Eden lasting only an hour, and we don’t think of Eden sinking into grief
because of sunlight. The comparison, however, is interesting because in cosmic terms, Eden only
lasted an hour – or even less. And what put an end to Adam and Eve’s life in Eden was the
gaining of knowledge, which is very often symbolized by light
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
5–6 Rhyme
7 Comparison: the turning of the leaf from gold to green is now compared to the dawn turning into
morning
8 Extrapolation: the poet draws a conclusion here, based on the three things he has now compared
to each other. His conclusion is that we must always lose that which is gold. We might see this as
a rather depressing conclusion, or we might see it as an observation that one of the reasons that
we see things as golden – special – is that they are rare and fleeting
7–8 Rhyme
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do literary concepts such as metaphor, paradox, comparison and extrapolation function as tools to help
make knowledge in other areas such as the human sciences or mathematics?
In general, then, when we engage with a work of art in order to try to understand its meaning, we must observe
closely, consider the potential significance of the details that we observe and then draw conclusions. We are
accustomed to thinking of the making of art as a creative act, but we can now see that the interpretation of art is a
creative act as well.
ACTIVITY
After you have completed this activity you can check your answers by using the QR code.
Examine the painting below and try to interpret it using your own existing knowledge. Note the details.
Which ones seem to you to be the most important? If you have an opportunity to do so, speak to a
classmate about their ideas after you have developed some of your own, and see if together you can
strengthen your interpretation.
It is not our aim, in this book, to teach you all of the literary or visual techniques that are used in works of art, and
which, if you know about them, can help you to interpret artworks in a more sophisticated way. If you are interested
in a more detailed look at how to analyse, you may wish to read Textual Analysis for English Language and
Literature and Literary Analysis for English Literature, both by Angela Stancar Johnson and Carolyn Henly and
published by Hodder Education. The first of those books includes good advice on how to interpret artworks which
are not text-based, such as advertisements, propaganda posters, photographs, political cartoons and paintings.
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Finally, in an earlier section of this chapter, we explored the way in which our personal knowledge and background
shapes how we interpret art. It is worth realizing that what that means is that all of our personal experience and
knowledge are tools to help us interpret. When you come to try to understand a work of art, you have to bring
everything you know to the table. We saw, for example, that a poem can be about mathematics. A number of years
ago, the IB Literature exam in English included a poem whose central metaphor was the double helix of DNA, and
so rich understanding of the poem required knowledge of biology. ‘Nothing Gold Can Stay’ required us to know
about plants just coming out of the ground – photosynthesis – and the biblical story of the Garden of Eden.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
How does knowing more about the social, cultural or historical context of a work of art have an impact on
our knowledge of the work itself?
Notice how all three of these methods come together: which details we notice and how we can interpret their
significance will depend on our knowledge and worldview, and speaking to others about an artwork will give us
access to more knowledge and perspectives. All of these methods will help us to make knowledge in the arts.
CONCEPT CONNECTION
Evidence and objectivity
Throughout this section, we have looked at the methods for interpreting art. Interpretation is another of
the 12 central course concepts, and an important point about the interpretation of art is that, although
differing interpretations are possible, not just anything goes. Art works do not just mean whatever the
audience wants them to mean. Artists made choices, and we are bound by those choices. We cannot
just look at a painting or sculpture, or listen to a song, or read a poem and then say ‘it means whatever I
want it to mean’. If you want some particular meaning based on your own personal wishes, then you
don’t need a work of art; you can just go off on your own and contemplate the ideas you wish to
contemplate. The act of interpreting a work of art is, to the degree that it is possible, a joint effort
between artist and audience. As a member of the audience, when you offer an interpretation of a work of
art, you must provide evidence for your interpretation. The evidence comes from the work of art.
If the work is visual, a painting or sculpture, for instance, your evidence will be physical features of the
work of art – colours or placement on a canvas or the shape of the lines in a sculpture. If the work is a
song, the evidence will come from the words, notes and rhythms. If you read the analysis of the Eminem
rap song, you saw that that person gave us a great deal of evidence in the form of the rhymes being
used, the instances of assonance, and the use of rhythm. If the artwork is a piece of literature, then, the
evidence comes from the words in the text. Accurate identification of the evidence in a piece of art
requires you to be objective.
When it comes to art, whether the work appeals to you or not is a matter of your opinion. However, when
it comes to developing an interpretation – an argument as to what the artwork means – reasoned
justification is required. There may be multiple reasonable interpretations, but there are wrong
interpretations. It would not be rational for someone to read ‘Nothing Gold Can Stay’ and claim that it is a
poem about slavery in the United States before the Civil War. There just is no way to make the poem
mean that without ignoring what it really does say. Such an interpretation would be entirely subjective
(and irrational, in that it ignores what words mean). Interpretation of a work of art, then, requires
imagination, but also objectivity.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the aim of the arts shape the ethical obligations of artists and users of art in the same way that the
aim of the sciences shapes the ethical obligation of scientists? Of historians or mathematicians?
The aim of the arts is not as easy to define as the aim of the natural sciences is; however, we can safely say that one
aim is for artists to be able to express a personal vision of some truth about human life and experience through a
medium other than objective proposition. The material that artists work with is not circumscribed as is the material
with which scientists work: where the latter must focus on physical objects in nature, the former can focus attention
on literally anything that interests them. As we have seen, art can be about physical objects, mental abstractions,
maths, history, religion, personal relationships and much more.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Do the arts have the power to challenge established moral values?
We have also seen that the mechanisms artists employ are similarly unlimited. Dancers use their physical bodies to
make art, musicians use sound, either from vocal chords or from physical objects, visual artists use just about
anything from paint, clay, chalk or pencil to old tin cans, bicycle tyres or a urinal, and they use these materials in a
whole range of ever-expanding ways. Anything an artist can think of can be rendered into a work of art, and
anything an artist can use to convey their thoughts can be used in whatever way the artist devises. Given the
virtually unlimited materials and methods open to the artist, one might think that the aims and materials do not
constrain the artists by imposing ethical standards as they do in the natural sciences. Artists, are, nevertheless,
constrained in significant ways.
First of all, the arts are deeply, essentially, personal. Any work of art is a reflection of the individual vision and
viewpoint of the artist. When art has a powerful effect on an audience, it is because that person experiences a mental
and emotional connection to another human being: the artist. Hisham Matar describes the moment of discovery: ‘the
most magical moments in reading occur not when I encounter something unknown but when I happen upon myself,
when I read a sentence that perfectly describes something I have known or felt all along. I am reminded, then, that I
am really no different from anyone else’ (Matar). Matar uses literature as his example, but the point applies to all art.
We respond to art which reveals to us in a visceral way that another human being is fundamentally like us in some,
perhaps unexpected, way. Art must, therefore, be original. Forgery is unethical, in part, because forgeries decrease
the artist’s financial reward for their work; however, the more significant reason that forgery is wrong is that it
appropriates the personal discovery and creation of the artist. It betrays both artist and audience by making a
mockery of that human bond.
The recognition that to share and shape worldview is inherent in the aim of art is behind the argument over whether
‘artists’ which are not human can truly make art. In Thailand, for example, paintings made by elephants are sold to
tourists who are amazed at the sight of elephants apparently drawing recognizable objects – such as elephants
(UK/Scotland). Zoologist Desmond Morris explains what really happens: ‘… you will notice that, with each mark,
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Is the production and enjoyment of art subject to ethical constraints?
One ethical principle at work in the arts, then, is the value that it matters which mind generated the art. This principle
is what ultimately accounts for the fact that the da Vinci painting, Salvator Mundi, is worth so much more now than
it was when it was not known who really painted it. The world has, since the fifteenth century, placed a very high
value on da Vinci’s particular genius and creativity. The fact that the same painting painted by someone else does
not hold the same value as when we know it was painted by da Vinci reflects the fact that one of the very significant
functions of art is to connect the audience to the artist in a very personal way. Anything which interferes with or
distorts that process is unethical.
A final consideration is that social and ethical mores also constrain the making of knowledge, and practitioners can
be punished or even imprisoned for art or science which too far transgresses social codes of ethics. Legal constraints
limit how scientists can use animals in their work. Rick Gibson was famously arrested and fined for offending public
decency with his work ‘Fetus Earrings’ (Dow). The director of a museum in Denmark was fined 2000 kroner for
cruelty to animals after displaying Evaristti’s exhibit of fish in blenders, though the fine was later overturned in
court (‘Liquidising Goldfish’). No society would stand for the actual murder of a person for the sake of pursuing
knowledge in either the arts or the sciences. (Consider the controversy that still exists over the scientific knowledge
gained by the Nazis during the Second World War.)
The ethical constraints imposed by societal values on the making of knowledge in all areas of knowledge are real
and significant. They provide the most obvious ways in which ethics shape knowledge-making; however, the
constraints imposed on methods by the nature of the areas of knowledge themselves are equally real and significant.
The practitioners of each area of knowledge have a set of standards to which they must adhere if the knowledge
generated is to be considered viable. That which is ethical in the areas of knowledge, in other words, is that which
allows for the aims to be met. In the arts, that primarily means that that which is unethical is that which interferes
with the artist’s proper right of ownership of their creative and intellectual work and the ability of the artist to
communicate with an audience.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
What moral responsibilities do we have regarding art that has been created or published by other
people?
One fairly well-known example of a figure who has spawned a lot of controversy over cultural appropriation is
rapper Iggy Azalea. She is a white singer born in Australia who has made a huge success of rapping. She has
become one in a long line of musicians – including Elvis Presley – who have appropriated music from the African
American musical tradition in the southern United States. The problem is that historically, white singers have taken
the music and then effectively erased the history, leaving the originators with no credit while the white singers
become famous (Zimmerman). Iggy Azalea has been accused of fitting right into this historical trend:
Iggy’s alleged crime is twofold: she gets to profit off of her white appeal while simultaneously selling a
black sound. She is making a huge career for herself by mimicking the vocal patterns and phrases of a
southern black girl – in effect … stealing that nameless black girl’s own success in the process.
(Zimmerman)
Learner profile
Principled
What principles are the most important ones in helping to determine what constitutes the ethical practice
of art?
Another example comes from the Indigenous people of Australia. Christopher Sainsbury, a Dhurang composer
working in Sydney, writes about the problem of non-Indigenous composers borrowing elements of Indigenous
music ‘Without appropriate engagements with Indigenous peoples’. Sainsbury argues when non-Indigenous
composers ‘reference’ Indigenous music without interacting with, or giving credit to, the source of the music, those
composers disenfranchise the Indigenous composers.
This problem is very similar to the problem of the white artists in America usurping the music of African American
ACTIVITY
How can we know when a work of art is an example of cultural appropriation and when it is an example
of paying homage to other artists’ work?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the problem of knowledge appropriation occur in other areas of knowledge such as the natural
sciences and history?
This kind of immoral behaviour is not limited to Hollywood or film actors. Pablo Picasso appears to have been a
cruel misogynist. His granddaughter wrote of him, in a memoir: ‘He submitted them [women] to his animal
sexuality, tamed them, bewitched them, ingested them, and crushed them onto his canvas. After he had spent many
nights extracting their essence, once they were bled dry, he would dispose of them’ (Lee). Some of Picasso’s art
depicted the Minotaur, a mythological creature half-man and half-bull, which can, from one perspective, be seen as
preparing to assault a woman. From another perspective, the art world has praised these drawings as being symbols
of virility and power (Lee). Bad behaviour, of course, can extend well beyond misogyny and sexual misconduct.
Ernest Hemingway – among many others – was a well-known anti-Semite. He was also a womanizer who, after his
first wife confronted him about having an affair admitted to it and then blamed her for damaging their marriage by
trying to discuss it. He was called, by various people who knew him, selfish, callous and cruel (Kogan). TS Eliot
was another writer known to be anti-Semitic, and Theodore Geisel – Dr Seuss – was a well-known bigot (Morris). A
little research would turn up many more examples.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Can we separate the moral character of the artist from the value of the artwork?
This leaves us with an ethical dilemma: do we discount the artwork of artists who have shown themselves to be, to a
greater or lesser degree, unethical, immoral or evil?
In the contemporary crisis of the series of revelations of sexual misconduct, the employers of many of the men who
have been accused have demonstrated their answer to the question by firing the men. Whether those employers are
truly outraged by the behaviour, or whether they are just worried that the public will boycott any movie, play, opera
or television series in which those men appear is unknown, and ultimately, irrelevant. The market has spoken: a
judgment by society has been made, at least in the short term.
A number of difficult questions remain: if these men are bad enough people that their work is tainted beyond repair,
then why isn’t the work of men from earlier times equally shunned? Is it a matter of knowledge? In the twenty-first
century, knowledge of such charges can be disseminated around the world instantaneously. In the 1920s, when
Hemingway was writing and Picasso painting, news did not travel so far or so quickly. Are the moral standards of
the twenty-first century significantly different from the moral standards of the early twentieth century? Perhaps what
we now believe, culturally, sets a higher standard for the modern artist than artists used to have to meet. If that is the
case, however, should modern readers not reject Hemingway’s work, and modern viewers of art, Picasso’s?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the same question about the relationship between the moral character of the artist and his or her
work arise in other AOKs?
The opposing argument is that if art is indeed a reflection of the artist, and if part of the purpose and the wonder of
art is our ability to connect mentally and emotionally with an artist, then it does matter who makes the work – a
position that we have argued earlier in this chapter.
It seems quite obvious that a good person can create a bad piece of art, but can a bad person create a good work of
art? We have no answer to this thorny question. Ultimately, it will be answered by individuals and by society at
large. If you are uncomfortable enough with the person, once you know the ways in which their character has been
demonstrated by behaviour, to be uncomfortable with their art, then you will reject the art. Perhaps, even if you feel
that the art does stand separately from the artist, when you try to watch The Usual Suspects again, you will find that
it is tinged with the revelations of Kevin Spacey’s off-screen life, or that if you look at Picasso’s portraits of women,
they are now shadowed by the painter’s real-life cruelties. If society at large speaks by boycotting the work of artists
who have become notorious for their immoral behaviour, then that work will not be shared and passed along for
future generations. In either case, the opinion of experts will not decide this question. Like the judgment of art itself,
judgment of the artist will occur on many different fronts.
KNOWLEDGE QUESTION
Does the character of knowledge-makers in other areas of knowledge raise similar questions as to the
value of the knowledge they create?
KNOWLEDGE QUESTIONS
Do the arts play a role in the development of our personal value systems?
How important is the study of literature in our individual ethical development?
Some works of art are overtly moral, with an intentional aim of helping the audience recognize right from wrong.
Shakespeare’s Hamlet played just this role in the former Soviet Union, where the play helped to bind the people
together in an understanding of their shared struggles. Photographs, such as the one below, are meant to cause us to
feel empathy and both to encourage us to do something about this situation or similar ones, and to discourage us
from ever treating animals in this way.
Folk singer Joni Mitchell’s 1970 song ‘Big Yellow Taxi’ is a powerful criticism of the destruction of nature, which
is still relevant today. You can use the QR code on the right to listen to the song.
An impeccably rehearsed troupe using brooms can inspire us to believe in the capacity of humans to achieve
perfection through hard work and true collaborative effort. Use the second QR code on the right to watch a clip from
Stomp Live! Be sure to turn up the volume.
All of these are examples of artworks which have the power to affect the way we see the world in terms of what is
right and what is wrong, and to inspire us to believe in and to reach for what is good. When we asked the question,
earlier in this chapter, of whether art has the power to cause change, we were asking an ethical question. The answer
would appear to be that, at least one mind at a time, it does, indeed, have that power.
B
backgrounds beliefs 66–8
Ballou, Sullivan 135–6
beauty 404–6
see also arts
Behe, Michael 193–5
beliefs
backgrounds beliefs 66–8
defining 43–4
and evidence 12–13
versus knowledge 44–5
see also justification
benevolence 184
Berinmo culture 162
bias
cognitive 22–3
confirmation 22, 249–50
gender 94–6
social 95
and technology 94–6
unconscious 67
Bible 209
Genesis 195, 200, 209
Big Bang theory 304–5, 318
big data 96–7
biology 297–9
Bletchley Park 237
Bolshevik Revolution 1917 238
Brexit 248–9
Buddhism 184–5, 191, 209
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
C
Caravaggio 422
cars, autonomous 106–8
Catechism of Catholic Church 185
categorization 150
Catholic Church 185
and the heliocentric universe 10, 14–15
role of Pope 208–9
censuring 31
census viii
certainty 3–7, 18, 34, 141, 315
absolute 3–7
in mathematics 287
and reasonable doubt 6, 45
see also ambiguity
Challenger Space Shuttle 229
chemistry 299–301
chess, computers playing 86–8
Christianity 183, 185, 191, 196–8, 200, 208–10, 211
see also religion
chronological accounts 369–70
claims 42–6
unconfirmed hypothesis 194
unfalsifiable hypothesis 194
see also beliefs; knowledge
climate change
and myth 171
Paris Agreement 235–6
and politics 235–7
Clinton, Hillary 19
codification 26
cognitive ability, and language 122–4
cognitive bias 22–3
cognitive needs 8
cognitive tools 69–71
coherence theory 45–6
colloquialisms 2, 6, 15, 134
see also language
communities
and cognitive tools 70–1
holding knowledge 40–1, 51–6, 73–4
the internet as 102–3
computers 86–90
see also artificial intelligence (AI); technology
concurrence 31
confirmation bias 22, 249–50
Confucianism 191
conjoined twins ethical dilemma 71–3
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Copernicus 10, 14–15, 17
correspondence theory 45
cosmological arguments 206
critical thinking 47
cubism 404
culture 8–9
anthropology 177
and art 412
cultural appropriation 430–1
and interpretation 17, 69–70
and knowing 40–1
and language 126, 128–9, 139–40, 162
and natural sciences 310–11
and objectivity 22–3
and politics 230
storing knowledge 102–3
and vocabulary 126
see also Indigenous societies
Cushing, Frank Hamilton 178
D
Darwin, Charles 15
Darwinian evolutionary theory 193
data 82–3, 348–51
big data 96–7
scope of 99
storing knowledge 101–3
da Vinci, Leonardo 424
Declaration of Independence 11–12
deductive reasoning 5–6, 47
democracy 230
see also politics
dialect 144
dichotomy 25
Dick, Philip. K. iv
dictionaries 79
dilemmas, ethical 21, 71–4, 107–8
disinterestedness 21, 22, 209
see also objectivity
displacement 116
divine command theory 217–18
doctrine 200
dogma 212–13
driverless cars 265
duality of language 116
E
Easter Island 163
Euclidean geometry 274–5
education
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
higher 235
and politics 232–5
Einstein, Albert 48
emotion
and the arts 406
and knowing 47, 69
Enigma machine 276
Enlightenment
knowledge systems 153–4
paradigm 177
scientific perspective 155
enlightenment 190
epistêmê 81, 86
epistemology 81
Equality Challenge Unit (ECU) 67
etatism 27
ethics 8
and the arts 428–35
codes of 31
ethical dilemmas 21, 71–4, 107–8
ethical knowledge 26
ethical theory 74–6
and the human sciences 360–4
and Indigenous societies 175–6
and language 141–2
and mathematics 285–8
and natural sciences 321–5
and politics 250–3
and religion 217–18
and technology 103–5
European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) 48–9
evidence 318
and belief 12–13
doctoring of 231
facts as 9–11
historical 17, 27–8
in the natural sciences 17
observational 98
physical 11–12
and proof 12
evolution
in schools 234
theory of 15, 309–11
exoneration 19
expertise 54–5, 422
expert opinion 43
explanation 13–16, 205
and justification 19
and mathematics 284
see also theory
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
exploitation 29
F
facial recognition software 104–5
facts
availability of 17, 42
correspondence theory 45
as determining factor 11
and evidence 9–10
interpretation of 16–17
versus opinion 10
faith 199–200
religious 69
as trust 69
see also religion
‘fake news’ 93, 249
Fermat’s Last Theorem 140
Feynman, Richard 326
Flat Earth Society 67
Flew, Antony 187–8
formal arguments see arguments
freedom
religious 26
and responsibility 31
of speech 93
French Revolution 1789 238
Frost, Robert 426–7
fundamentalism 210
G
Gagarin, Yuri 266
Galileo 15
games, and technology 86–9
Gandhi, Mahatma 381
gatekeepers, of the internet 103
gender bias 94–6
generalization 52
Genesis 195, 200, 209
Getty kouros 68
Glorious Revolution 1688 238
God
existence of 203–8
nature of 188–90
see also religion
Goldberg, Rube 113
Goodall, Jane 138
Google
and big data 96
market share 98
H
Haidt, Jonathan 227
Hamlet 415
heliocentric universe 10, 14–15
Henry IV 418–20
hierarchies 221
hierarchy of needs 8
higher education 235
Himba culture 162
Hinduism 184, 189, 191, 209
history 367–400
Collingwood’s inside/outside distinction 374–8
doctoring of evidence 231
and facts 372–3
and perspective 26–8
and physical evidence 17
rewriting of 231–4
homosexuality 211
honey bees 119–20
human rights 10, 91–2
human sciences 332–65
areas of study 337
ethical considerations 360–4
experiments 351–2
methods and tools 345–70
psychology 337–45
Hume, David 75
hypotheses 194, 296
I
IB (International Baccalaureate) mission statement 25–6
illusion 56–9, 70
imagination 69, 281–2
impiety 10
impossible trident illusion 70
inalienable rights 10
Indigenous societies 147–79
animism 156
cultural assumptions 151–2
defining 150–1
knowledge systems 152–4
languages 160–3
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
myths 169–72
perspectives 155–8
rituals 164–9
visions 173–5
induction, problem of 4
inductive conclusions 3–4
inerrancy 210
inevitability v
infallibility 210
influences, on our knowledge 60, 65–7
information
as knowledge 84
as processed data 83
reliability of 92–4
infrastructure 241
institutional politics 224–9
intellectual gymnastics 67
internet
access to 90–2
gatekeepers 103
reliability of information 92–4
interpretation 69–70, 359–60
of facts 16–17
and translation 132
see also sense perception
intuition 67–9, 281–2
Islam 183, 184, 191, 209–10, 211, 214
J
James, William 406
Johnson, Katherine 266
Judaism 183, 185–6, 191, 209, 211
Julian of Norwich 215
justification 19–21, 202
in academia 20
convincing others 47–8
and ethical dilemmas 21
of knowledge claims 46–8
in politics 250–3
and rationalization 19
self-serving 19, 21
K
karma 189
knowing
‘how’ versus ‘that’ 49–51
‘individual knowers’ 40–1, 53–60, 65–6
see also knowledge
knowledge
L
Lake Titicaca 167
Lakota people 173
language 112–44
and ambiguity 115
and animals 118–20
arbitrariness of 114–15
the arts as 120–2
and cognitive ability 122–4
colloquial 3, 6, 15
and culture 126, 128–9, 139–40, 162
defining 114, 122
dialect 144
dictionaries 79
displacement 116
duality 116
dying languages 132
and ethics 141–2
Google Translate 90, 94, 112, 133
Indigenous societies 160–3
languages of the world 128
learning a foreign language 137
mastering 134–6
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
and mathematics 122
meaning and knowing 53, 69, 70, 113, 127–31, 138–40, 162
political correctness 222–3
and power 134–5, 143–4
productivity of 116–17
recording and storing knowledge 99–103
semantics 114
text messages 137
traditional transmission 117–18
translation 132–3
vocabulary 124–7
voice recognition 96
laws and law-making 239–41
Linnaean classification 307–8
Little Albert 362
Locke, John 158
logic, validity of 5–6
lying 22, 142–3
in politics 247–50, 253–4
see also truth
M
Magna Carta 237
maps
accuracy of 61–2
as metaphor for knowledge vii–viii, 60–6
of the world 61–5
Marovo Lagoon 158–9
Maslow, Abraham 8, 411
Maslow’s hierarchy of needs 8, 411
mathematics 258–89
ambiguity 285–6
applied 275–6, 282–5
ethical concerns 285–8
as invention or discovery 277–8
language of 122
mathematical proofs 5, 284
origins of 261–2
perspectives on 271–8
pure 271–5, 278–82
Pythagorean Theorem 279–81
Roman numerals 262
Mayangna 161
memory
and knowledge 69
unreliability of 47, 70
metaphors see Allegory of the Cave; maps
microscopes 98–9
Milgram experiment 352–5
misogynism 431–2
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
mnemonics 260
Moon landings 266–7
Moon rocks 16–17
moral arguments 206–8
Moral Foundations theory 227–8
moral licensing 14
morals 8
mores 8
mysticism 215
myths 169–72
N
Native Americans 147–50, 173–4
natural law theory 218–19
natural sciences 293–327
applications of 297–304
Aristotelian classification 306–7
Big Bang theory 304–5, 318
biology 297–9
chemistry 299–301
ethical considerations 321–5
and evidence 17
experiments 294, 312
and justification 48–9
Linnaean classification 307–8
objects of study 296–7
perspectives on 304–11
physics 301–3
pseudoscience 194, 293–5
scientific method 312–20
and technology 98
theories in 15–16
see also human sciences
natural selection 15
news
fake 93
via social media 93
Newton, Isaac 15
Nineteen Eighty-Four 231
North Korea, Three Generations of Punishment rule 240
Nyanja dialect 112
O
Obama, Barack 235–6
obfuscation 27
objectivity 22–4, 44, 73, 314, 380, 428
barriers to 22–3
cognitive bias 22–3
preconceptions 22
observational evidence 98
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
Olympic Games 168
ontological arguments 204–5
open-mindedness 23
OPERA experiment 48–9
opinion
as appropriate determining factor 10–11, 21
and belief 12–13
defining 41–4
expert 43
versus facts 10
and justification 21, 48
as transferable to others 48
see also personal knowledge; subjectivity
Orwell, George 231
P
Paris Agreement 235–6
Pascal, Blaise 201–2
Pascal’s Wager 203
Periodic Table 299
perspective 25–8
historical 26–8
Indigenous societies 155–8
and the ‘individual knower’ 56–60
irreconcilable 26
and language 128
and privilege 54
and social media 28
phenomena viii
phrónesis 81
physical evidence 11–12
physics 301–3
Plato 57
Pluto, lost status of planet 4
politics 221–54, 227–8
beliefs versus knowledge 224, 242–3
and culture 230
democracy 230
and education 232–5
ethical justifications 250–3
funding 237
hierarchies 221
history of 237–8
infrastructure 241
institutional 224–9
and knowledge 225, 231, 242–50
law-making 239–41
and lying 247–50, 253–4
Moral Foundations theory 227–8
perspectives on 226–32
Q
quantifiable data 84
Qur’an 209, 214
R
racism, and unconscious bias 67
Rapa Nui 163
rationalizations 19, 202
reality
Allegory of the Cave 56–8
aspects of 34
assumptions about 33–4
defining iv–v
denial of v
S
salvation 190
Sámi people 170–1
Sateré-Mawé initiation rites 165
Saudi Arabia, as absolute monarchy 238
schools, and politics 232–4
science
scientific method 312–20
scientific reductionism 153
scientific theory 15–16
see also Enlightenment; human sciences; natural sciences
scruples 29
secular beliefs 184
self-actualization 8
self-driving cars see autonomous cars
semantics 114
sense perception 69, 70, 406
Shakespeare, William 124, 142, 415, 418–21
Shintoism 184, 209
Sitting Bull 173–4
Snodgrass, W.D. 416–17
social bias 95
social media
as news source 93
as primary sources 28
social mores 8
solemnity 11
solipsism 33
Soloman Islands 158–9
soundness 5
Sputnik 266
Stalin, Joseph 27, 231
stereotyping 52
Stroop Effect 352
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
subjectivity 22–4, 43, 404
subversive manipulation 222
Swinburne, Richard 216
syllogism 5–6
symbiosis 320
T
Talmud 185–6
Taoism 191, 210–11
Tao te Ching 210–12
technê 81, 86
technology 78–108
and bias 94–5
big data 96–7
and creation of knowledge 98–9
and ethics 103–5
and language 137
military 105–6
and political knowledge 244–6
teleological arguments 205–6
text messages 137
theocracy 230
theology 185
theory
concept of 15
in the natural sciences 15–16
theory of evolution 15
‘thin-slicing’ 68
Three Generations of Punishment rule 240
Tillich, Paul 189
Torah 186, 209, 218
Torlino, Tom 147–50
transcendence needs 8
trinity 200
truisms 104
truth
claims and propositions 42–6
coherence theory 45–6
correspondence theory 45
defining 42
and language 142
and mathematics 270
nature of 33–4
see also certainty; evidence; knowledge; proofs
Turing, Alan 237, 276
U
unconfirmed hypothesis 194
unconscious bias 67
see also cognitive bias
******ebook converter DEMO Watermarks*******
unfalsifiable hypothesis 194
utility of objects 406–7
V
validity 5–6
values 35–6, 190, 226, 276, 286, 326
see also ethics
viewpoint see perspective
visions 173–5
visual perceptions 84
vocabulary 124–7
see also language
W
war and conflict
development of technology 108
and politics 237
uses of technology 105–6
Wikipedia 103
Wiles, Andrew 140
Winter’s Tale, The 142
Wittgenstein, Ludwig 151, 195–8
Wounded Knee massacre 367–9
written knowledge 99–103
Y
YouTube 93–4
yucca moths 318–20
Z
Zuni people 178