• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Are some ways of knowing more likely than others to lead to truth?

Extracts from this document...


Tok Essay: Are some ways of knowing more likely than others to lead to truth? This is indeed a very interesting question, because in Theory of knowledge you have many ways of knowing, but all different from each other, and they all represent a different way of knowing and all have different accuracies at finding the truth. There are for example; emotion, reason, language, and sense perception. In middle class English the question is asking, "Which ways of knowing are more precise to find the truth than others?" My guess would be that places where you use reasoning would be the most precise, and yes this is without a doubt an assumption I have made. The reason I think "reason" is the most precise way of knowing to find the truth is because, you can relate "reason" to very precise and accurate subjects such as maths, chemistry, and physics where in general you are seeking one precise and accurate answer. The only exception would be in maths where you can find two answers when looking for the X intercepts of a coordinate graph in quadratic equations. To back up my assumption I have an example in maths, if you take a simple equation such as 2+2, it would not take too much thinking to realize the answer is four, but to prove the answer is four, you use reasoning. ...read more.


For example you could be discussing some homework in Physics, about the resistance of wire and how you have each individually calculated the given problem, in the end you compare results with your class mates and your teacher shows you the correct answer and how to do it. When he has shown you the correct way, you in most cases cannot prove him wrong unless he has made a mistake, because in Physics you follow a set of given equations which you must follow in order to complete the question, whereas in English we could take a similar example where a set of students have read a book, and for homework had to determine the message in the story. All classmates could have different answers and none of them could be wrong, in the end classmates and the teacher could discuss the different answers, but cannot defiantly say none of the answers are correct. Therefore when comparing the two subject, you would generally say in this case Physics is more accurate in the way that you can determine an answer more precisely. In language a simple sentence such as "Wow, you're so stupid" can be misunderstood in so many ways, usually because of different cultures, and how their language influences their understanding of certain ways of communicating. For example the given sentence I have written, Danish people are typically good with understanding irony, and in this case I wrote "Wow, you're so stupid" ironically. ...read more.


Time is an enemy for the preciseness of sense perception, this is because as you get older your ability to hear weakens, which decreases the chance of you interpreting correctly through hearing. The next sense is seeing, as years pass ones eye sight usually weakens and therefore your ability to see through ways of knowing diminishes slowly. The next sense would be tasting, as you experience exotic foods you taste buds slowly ware out, for example the reason for children in most cases disliking strong cheeses is because they taste buds are sensitive compared to the adults warn out taste buds, this also wanes the preciseness of your ability to taste. The two senses which actually stay in the same shape are smell and feeling. In conclusion to sense perception, when 3/5 of the senses are inaccurate, it is hard to determine the truth of a given problem. In conclusion I state that "reason" is the best ways of knowing to find the truth, I back up my statement with all of the following examples which I have shown for each different way of knowing. To end this essay I simply say, "The truth is hard to determine whatever way of knowing you use its how you interpret the truth that makes it more precise. ?? ?? ?? ?? Phillip J�hnk Juel Nielsen TOK Herlufsholm Skole 2IB Essay 08-02-2010 Underskrift:___________ Side 1 af 3 L�rer: JBU ________________________________________________________________________________ ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related International Baccalaureate Theory of Knowledge essays

  1. Do we need to grow up in a human community in order to develop ...

    on the facts, and reflect on the information (these steps obviously integrating the other ways of knowing), we obtain knowledge.

  2. Oversimplication in the Ways of Knowing

    One interprets the method to discover that it will always work when given the same type of problem. This interpretation leads to the fact that in a certain problem such as x + 5 = 9, using the method will yield the correct answer of 4.

  1. What is Gentleman? What are the characteristics of the Gentleman? Is it possible to ...

    This idea is same with Plato's idea about the knowledge. Plato said that every person had the special knowledge in mind which needs to develop. After developing this narrow knowledge, he pursue to be the educated (know the morality, kindness and norms of behavior)

  2. In what way does the problem of evil lead to atheism?

    Richard Swinburne tried to offer a definition of God as "a person, without a body (i.e. a spirit), present everywhere, the creator and sustainer of the universe, a free agent, able to do everything (i.e. omnipotent), knowing all things, perfectly good, a source of moral obligation, immutable, eternal, a necessary

  1. "Context is all" (Margaret Atwood). Does this mean that there is no such thing ...

    It's not until we change the context, e.g.: present day, that the truth loses all its validity. This shows that the truth we derive from the validity of the sources is completely relative depending in the context which it is presented in, which means that the truths we know now may not be considered truths in the future.

  2. Compare and contrast knowing a friend to knowing how to swim,knowing a scientific theory ...

    My father was in the 2nd War, so I know it happened and I know certain events that actually happened. Knowing a historical period is based on accepting evidence from the past. We rely on evidence that exists; both new evidence and new interpretations of evidence can change our view.

  1. Are some ways of knowing more likely than others to lead to truth?

    aware of the true meaning of his language; therefore I would not be close to the truth, but rather away from it. ?Thought is not merely expressed in words, it comes into existence through them?[2]. The relationship between thought and language is very complex when you become aware of its integral nature.

  2. TOK Essay. The entire accuracies of mathematics and the natural sciences rely on the ...

    So language is a necessity in the natural sciences. For perception, the natural sciences require you to use your senses almost always. In chemistry, biology, and physics, you need your eyes to observe your experiments. You may also need to touch, for example in chemistry, to see if a reaction is endothermic or exothermic.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work