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

What are the differences between "I am certain" and "it is certain", and is passionate conviction ever sufficient for justifying knowledge?

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Candidate name: Tam Wai Kit, Jonathan Candidate code: 001225-020 School: Yew Chung International School International Baccalaureate Diploma - Theory of Knowledge (ToK) What are the differences between "I am certain" and "it is certain", and is passionate conviction ever sufficient for justifying knowledge? The difference between "I am certain" and "It is certain" deals with the difference between subjectivity and objectivity, in terms of expressing and justifying knowledge. "I am certain" involves personal interpretation in a particular event (subjective), whereas "It is certain" tries to avoid such a problem. To the observer, subjective observations are equally as real as objective observations, with the fact that objective observations are common to all subjects where subjective ones vary among different observers. Subjectivity often involves personal emotion, and therefore it is likely to be affected and misled by the subject thus it differs from the reality. In Economics, we have a similar concept: positive and normative statements. Positive economics are objective, and therefore can be tested by available evidence. Normative statements are subjective and express an opinion1. Normative statements are subjective. For example, an economist might say, "I am certain that the cyclical employment is due to the low efficiency of the government in terms of its fiscal policies". ...read more.

Middle

It seems that passionate conviction, in some ways, hinders our path of acquiring knowledge, and moreover, such emotional attachment is related to the use of "I am certain". However, in other areas of knowledge this is not always the case. Sometimes we need conviction in order to justify knowledge. Cyberneticians agreed that in the nervous system there is no fundamental distinction between perception and a hallucination: both are merely patterns of neural activation. However, subjectively most people have no difficulty distinguishing dreams or fantasies from perceptions.8 Then, the areas where objectivity is unable to classify will then be dependent on conviction. However, how do we distinguish between subjectivity and objectivity? How can science, being classified as the means of justifying knowledge objectively, be demarcated from other knowledge-producing systems, such as religion? Science is a way of people explicitly promotes the following: invariance, distinctiveness and controllability. However, is science always reliable, even in areas that are not bounded by science itself? How can science investigate the existence of God, if God himself is above such a system? Therefore we come to one conclusion: science might be able to prove some phenomena in the world, but it is not necessarily the only way for us, as knowers, to acquire knowledge. ...read more.

Conclusion

But what if this passionate conviction originates from a psychopath? His conviction might be even more consistent than any scientist on the planet, and his belief will not alter. In this case the reason suggested above will not stand but is this strong evidence we could base on when we are trying to justify his words? If he says, "I am certain that I am GOD." and he believes he has the power of controlling the world, then undoubtedly this is not knowledge Since it cannot be justified by the other three ways of knowing. For example, how can it be logical that GOD lives on this planet and unable to free himself from a psychiatric hospital? That certainly does not make sense, and in these examples passionate conviction will lead us to nowhere. Although this is an extreme case, it is also applicable to people who ignores all objective evidence on certain "facts" and struggle to keep their opinions in place. I am certain that there is sufficient evidence to prove that being engaged in subjectivity will not necessarily lead to knowledge and to have a better description of reality, objectivity is a more approachable way of knowing. However, it is also certain that being conviction-driven, although some occasions emotion being a hinder to knowing, can also be a tool to justifying knowledge. ...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. How important are the opinions of experts in the search for knowledge?

    We do not rely as heavily on those opinions as we do in Natural Sciences where most of the times, there is no way of gathering evidence and experience at all than from experts of those fields. When we look at the field of human sciences, we have subjects like

  2. How important are the opinions of experts in the search for knowledge?

    Let us take history as an area of knowledge for example. Today's events are tomorrow's history, thus if this very day was ever mentioned in history books, nobody but nobody can ever tell me what I was doing as they are not authorized to say so.

  1. Suicide is the taking of ones own life and considered unlawful. Should this ...

    His best friend loses his life from the werewolf and he eventually turns into a werewolf as a result of getting bit by the werewolf. His best friend Jack, comes back to haunt him and put a thought in his mind that he has to take his own life and

  2. How important are the opinions of experts in the search for knowledge?

    While it may be considered as a biased opinion on the part of public opinion of that nation, which doesn't count the subsequent (??????????????) deaths due to radiation side effects, expert opinion was nevertheless true, in that the bombing indeed ended the war speedily, and saved both Americans and Japanese from any more deaths resulting from actual combat.

  1. How important are the opinions of experts in the search for knowledge?

    Knowledge requires a justified true belief. Moreover being simple man of flesh and blood these so called experts can be prone to cultural bias, racial thinking and discrimination.

  2. Doubt is the key to knowledge, explain with reference to two areas of knowledge.

    Is it not possible that the enigmatic triangle is under the sway of some cynics or pirates who deliberately eliminate the intruders? As per Ptolemy?s geocentric theory (c. AD 90 ? c. 168) of planetary motion, all heavenly bodies move around the stationary earth that lies at the center of the universe.

  1. Free Will and Determinism

    Additionally it was said that this chemical imbalance could be traced through the individual?s genotype and derive that this imbalance was due to a mutation in the X chromosome. With that being said, the control of human behavior in terms of the free will and determinism debate comes to a breakpoint.

  2. We want to investigate on whether the development of computer technology brings more positive ...

    Web advertisements may seem harmless enough, and do not really bother us, but recently, some people are beginning to wonder whether they do infringe our privacy. Ever wondered why whenever you log onto your Gmail account, the advertisements in the ad column correspond to the content of your Gmail?

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