• 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?

    Though they gain knowledge from experts like the great revolutionary, Sigmund Freud, these theories rarely help them diagnose a patient. Diagnosis is done on the basis of instinct and deep study of the patient.

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

    seek guidance to priests for advice, and lastly children seek guidance to their parents for advice. All these examples relate in the way that the people they seek for help, are most likely more skilled in

  1. 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.

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

    I don't think that it should be encouraged or a solution. If the patient's family members and loved one's agree upon it and think that it is the best answer for everyone in the end. In the movie, "An American Werewolf in London," the main character, David Kessler is attacked by a werewolf in the beginning of the movie.

  1. TOK notes. The problem of knowledge There are three ...

    background; optical illusions are often based on changing backgrounds and contexts Figure and ground - double images - we consider one part of what we see as the main part (figure) and the rest as background (ground). (e.g. black color = letters in books is the figure)

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

    For example, the World Health Organization (WHO) recently declared a swine flu pandemic. As a result, many medical experts promoted the swine flu vaccine, as recommended by the WHO. Many governments in the world have relied upon expert opinion to carry out obligatory vaccination of their citizens.

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

    However, these advances are not without a price. In the computer and Internet world, it is our privacy that is at stake. In fact the very time when our computer is connected to the Internet, all the data we send or receive has the potential to be intercepted and retrieved

  2. 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.

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