Truth is that to which the community ultimately settles down (Charles Peirce). Analyse and evaluate this claim.
Essay 1 "Truth is that to which the community ultimately settles down" (Charles Peirce). Analyse and evaluate this claim. Truth--its definition, its pursuit, its discovery--is central to much of human intellectual activity. One place we look for clues about what is true is in the trends of the community. We may attempt to find it in religion or cultural beliefs, for example, that we have learned from a community that shares these beliefs. We know the earth is round or that war is bad because everyone knows it. 5 Pierce's statement praises this way of knowing, suggesting that community, whatever that community may be, is a key to the search for truth. This suggestion is tied to the idea of a body of human knowledge, the idea that the human race progresses as each community member adds to the world's knowledge, relying on what others have concluded is true and then building on it with his or her own new knowledge. Thus, knowledge is a group pursuit, closely tied to community. 0 There are many types of communities. The whole human race may be thought of as a knowledge community. The smaller group of all scientists is often referred to as the scientific community. Even a ToK class is a kind of community. Depending on what truth we seek, we may tie it to the community of the whole world or to a smaller community that reflects a focus on a particular area of
People need to believe that order can be glimpsed in the chaos of events (adapted from John Gray, Heresies, 2004). In what ways and to what extent would you say this claim is relevant in at least two areas of knowledge?
"People need to believe that order can be glimpsed in the chaos of events" (adapted from John Gray, Heresies, 2004). In what ways and to what extent would you say this claim is relevant in at least two areas of knowledge? In my essay I am going to discuss the importance of chaos and order in real life, and to what extent I agree with the title statement. The key concepts of this title is that belief is a necessity in perceiving order in chaotic events, and whether I approve or disapprove with this statement I shall evident my claim through two areas of knowledge. My claim is that belief is important to perceive order, and that it is necessary for people to believe that order can be glimpsed in the chaos of events, because the order is relying on the basis of belief and without believing the order will not be perceptible. This claim is relevant in all areas of knowledge as the chaos theory can be applied to all knowledge, but my main focus will primarily involve history and environmental science as my two areas of knowledge that will be viewed from perception and reason as my ways of knowing. The knowledge issues that are present are taken out of two real life situations, the first real life situation would be a prognosis of upcoming weather conditions, and the second, the Mayan civilization's foreshadowing of future events. The issues that are raised in this essay will be
TOK- The Ways of Knowing
. Perception - The main reason why I positioned perception above the other four WOKs is because perception, among others, is the one tool that is absolutely necessary to gain knowledge. Regardless of how much knowledge of reasoning, emotion, or language you possess, it all revolves around the idea of perception. Perception, in my view, is the ability to understand various matters at ease, a skill which represents basis of the course. I believe it is perception that ultimately gives shape to ambiguous thoughts and develop them further as it allows you to more fully apprehend ideas. What is made out of perception, however, is strictly due to people's pasts. People see things differently based on what they've been through- how people perceive the same matter can range all the way from the extreme positive to the extreme negative depending on personal experience. Real- Life Example- The concept of "the half filled/ emptied bottle" is completely to do with perception. If a person has experienced hardship and struggled through it, that person will most likely say that it is half filled because he is gracious for everything he/she can get. In contrast, if a person who has enjoyed wealth throughout his/her life, he/she will more likely say that the bottle is half emptied because he/she can get whatever he/she wants without going through hardships. 2. Reason - Reasoning, the
3 truths
Tests for Truth . The issue of slavery was not the primary cause for the American Civil War. Correspondence Since the American Civil War was in the past it does not match my reality. There is no actual fact that can be checked to prove this. That would make the position false since fact cannot be proven. You must know what slavery was like and the time and what the civil war was. Coherence Since slavery was a part of the time period and an issue the proposition can be considered true. It fits in with the way I look at things. Pragmatic The position is not useful since it was in the past and doesn't affect my reality. It would be useful to know this if I was fighting in the Civil War to know what I was fighting for. Could be true, but not useful unless I'm writing a paper on the topic. I don't know I wasn't there doing the time. 2. It was the build-up toward WW2 that ended the Great depression more than any blueprint for economic recovery drawn up by the Roosevelt administration. Correspondence You must know what ww2 is. Must know what the great depression was and who Roosevelt was. The statement makes sense to my understanding, but the blueprint could have been only one part that ended the depression. There could be a group of reasons that caused this. It's too big of position to know the full truth. Coherence The WW2 buildup was a big deal during the time so it
Thoery of Knowledge Essay
"Different cultures have different truths". "A truth is that which can be accepted universally." What are the implications for knowledge in agreeing with these opposing statements? Jack Tomlinson Theory of Knowledge Word Count: 1300 6/04/09 When first approaching these statements it appears as though they are contradictory, as they seem to convey two conflicting ideas of truth. The first statement relates to the idea of relativism, which simply refers to the belief that what is true is that which is accepted by one´s culture or community, whereas the second statement relates mainly to the idea of absolutism, which refers to an argument that claims that a statement is either completely true, or completely false, leaving nothing in between. The statements are in direct conflict with each other by means that the first leads us to imply that each individual culture has its own set of truths which do not have to be in correlation with other cultures truths, while the second directly contradicts the first by stating that nature of truth allows it to flow through all barriers (including the barrier of culture), making it universally acceptable. The implication for knowledge, if we agree with these conflicting statements, is the realization that cultural beliefs/truths are not automatically equivalent to universal truths and allows for an additional understanding of the ethical
Knowledge Vs Opinion Vs Propaganda
Theory of Knowledge Essay . There are many different authorities, including academies, politicians, global organisations and companies, who make knowledge claims. As an experienced TOK student, what criteria do you use to distinguish between knowledge, opinion and propaganda? In the modern and technological age of the 21st century, every human being around the world is united through the relentless flow of information that is forcefully being driven into our minds. As we live out our lives, we are continuously presented with this information at every turn, which, through the aid of our senses is then processed and interpreted in the appropriate procedure. Although this process is largely accepted, the flow of information has reached alarmingly high levels, to the extent that as a species we have not only gotten too familiar with the process, but have also learnt to overlook it completely. While this process of reasoning and classification has deteriorated, the veracity of information being presented to us has followed suit to capitalize on our credulousness, and by so leading us into readily accepting knowledge lacking both accuracy and reliability. It is by this nature that we have been introduced into two phases of knowledge known as opinion and propaganda, both deriving off information and carrying potential for knowledge, yet both ultimately facing severe inquiry if not
The Ascent of Money Book Report
THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE BOOK ANALYSIS The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World Word Count: 1,238 "The Ascent of Money: A Financial History of the World" is a non-fiction analysis of the history of money, banking, and the rise of financial systems by Niall Ferguson, a British historian and professor at Harvard University. In his book, Ferguson makes the argument that finance is at the root of all human progress and that a lack of financial systems results in a failed society, using the gold-rich Spanish Empire of the 16th century as an example. As well, he argues that all historical events, whether they are political, social, economic or otherwise, are deeply grounded in the global financial systems. Ferguson also tries to draw a parallel between financial systems and biological systems, making the claim that evolution and Darwinism apply to finance. He says, "Financial history is essentially the result of institutional mutation and natural selection." With these arguments, Ferguson explains candidly how finance has influenced past historical events. He reveals why Argentina went from being the world's 6th richest country to an "inflation-ridden basket case", how the French Revolution was started because of a stock market bubble, and how China is emerging from poverty into a global superpower in a single generation. Ferguson has crafted a well-written piece on the
Science Essay TOK
Alex Kluivert Theory of Knowledge I IB 4 March 2009 Facts vs. Facts Henri Poincare once said that "Science is built of facts the way a house is built of bricks: but an accumulation of facts is no more science than a pile of bricks is a house", this is a very interesting quote that one could derive many meanings from. The first thing that the quote shows is that there is more to science then just a random jumble of facts. It also poses the question that if science is built on facts yet facts do not always make up science, is there more than one type of fact? People certainly use the term fact loosely. Many times you will hear someone say that this is a historical fact, or this is a scientific fact. Is there a difference between these two? Yes, there is a huge difference, if one is to believe in a correspondent society the empirical truths of science should always come before the truths of history. Yet this is not always the case. For some reason people see science as debatable and history as more of an undisputed truth. This is wrong. Two of the most trusted and respected areas of knowledge in todays society are science and history, but when weighed against each other scientific facts should always offset historical facts. In a correspondence world, science is considered the strongest of the truth tests. An empirical truth is thought of as a fact that has been confirmed by
To understand something you need to rely on your own experience and culture. Does this mean that it is impossible to have objective knowledge?
IB Diploma Programme Examination session: May 2009 Utahloy International School of Guangzhou (IB code 001847) Theory of Knowledge Essay Title No: 8 "To understand something you need to rely on your own experience and culture. Does this mean that it is impossible to have objective knowledge?" (Number of words: 1600) Submitted by Xiang Wang (candidate no. 001847- 030) Table of Contents Introduction..............................................................................................3 Body....................................................................................................4-9 Conclusion............................................................................................10 Bibliography..........................................................................................11 Introduction Objective knowledge can be achieved even our experience and culture have been affecting us. However, it can only be achieved in certain areas of knowledge such as natural sciences and mathematics because the knowledge in these two is discovered. Other areas of knowledge are invented by us so objective knowledge can not be achieved in these areas because they are bias during the invention process. Knowledge can be defined as justified true belief, which means that if what we believe is true, and
Which sources of knowledge-books, websites, the media, personal experience, authorities or some other- do you most consider trustworthy, and why?
Which sources of knowledge-books, websites, the media, personal experience, authorities or some other- do you most consider trustworthy, and why? Every day we process new pieces of information, and from this new information we try to find the truth, to do this we need trustworthy information. We get information from everywhere, we're constantly being buffered by new knowledge, but what do we choose to be true and trustworthy? In the world today it is hard to be certain on anything, even own experiences, without having to rely on what you've read, seen, felt, been told etc. One of our main sources of knowledge historically are books, without them how could we know about the past, the world, different languages, practically everything, even what we learn in this course is in a book. Without them we would only be able to learn from word of mouth, our own experiences and the Internet, but this itself has only been around about 20 years. Books have been around for hundreds of years, but this does not make them trustworthy. Books can often be biased, if you were to compare an American history book to an English one they would surely tell different stories of the war, an author can only write from their own perspective, from what they've seen, heard, read and this could give them a completely different spin on something compared to you. And yet even though we know these things