Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang
7, section II, explores AIDS public healthChapterin South Africa. Chapter 9, section II, looks atpolicywork of expert commissions between countriestheresolve conicting histories. Comparing thesetowhat is the role of politics and how does itexamples,the credibility and authority of experts?aectconfidence in the fact that TOK is notTakein exploring issues of expertise andaloneknowledge. Questions about these issuespublicfundamental to protecting the citizen’sareissues are discussed by people andPoliticalwith various levels of power; they sharegroupsopinions, make claims with various degreestheirconfidence and make judgments about theofand validity of other perspectives. Thisreliabilitythe public discourse. How can youcharacterizesdifferent perspectives? How aware areevaluateof the forces that have shaped your politicalyouWhat would be sufficiently convincingviews?change your mind? As we proceed, recall thetoin Chapter 1 on intellectual humilitydiscussionsII.2) and thinking patterns and habits (in III.1).(inshapes depending on the context anddifferentconstraints. If you are curious about whatthediscussion looks like elsewhere, followthislink to an excellent conversation on publictheand the forces that shape it. HearknowledgeAmita Baviskar, from the Institute offromGrowth in New Delhi, and RifkaEconomicfrom the University of StrasbourgWeehuizen,for Advanced Study. They discussInstituteexpert and layperson knowledge canhowintegrated into a relationship based onbevalues and participation.democraticterms: public knowledgeSearchobjectivity andacademicsmart way to keep people passive and obedientTheto strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion,isallow very lively debate within that spectrum—butencourage the more critical and dissident views.evengives people the sense that there’s free thinkingThaton, while all the time the presuppositions of thegoingare being reinforced by the limits put on thesystemof the debate.rangeII. PerspectivesI. ScopeII. PerspectivesMaking connectionsPolitics in science and historyvoice in government, and the answers taketeaching profit motivationI I . P E R S P E C T I V E SII.1 The Overton window(Chomsky 1998)29
II. Perspectives“Overton window” is a term used toThethe range of ideas tolerated withindescribediscourse and, therefore, the range ofpublicand politically acceptable policies insociallygovernment. Policies outside of thisdemocraticwill appear too extreme—“unthinkable”range“radical”—to be supported by politicians.orwindow is shaped by the climate of publicTheand so the media can play a very largeopinion,Note that the window does not necessarilyrole.near the middle of the political spectrum.sitpoliticians, social commentators andSkillfulin the public sphere can intentionallyactivistsor expand the window through reasonshiftrhetoric. Some may deliberately promoteandideas so that slightly less extremeextremewhich were previously outside theideas,become more widely accepted bywindow,Think tanks, for example, needcomparison.promote particular policies but can rathernotout of the Overton windowLookingHow do we know where the Overton1.Would you expect two strangers to agree2.what is inside the window? Why oraboutAre there some ideas, policies or issues that3.not be politicized? If so, how wouldshouldCompare the relative power of the following4.to shift the window: socialstakeholdersorganizations, cinema, search engines,mediaand television media; teachers,print5. Recall an example of the window shifting.was previously unacceptable,Whatis now policy, and vice versa?butmake previously unacceptable policies moretoThis tactic is often used by activistpalatable.is worth noting that the Overton window isItnecessarily a passive construct but rathernotassertive and dynamic one—a tool to shapeanshift political possibilities. Its point is thatand“window is there for the shifting”, and thusthenaturalizes ideas and policies as inherentlyitSome observers lament this sort ofpolitical.arguing for instance that climate justicething,women’s rights should not be politicized,andthese issues “speak for themselves”; weasnext section explores echo chambersThebubbles, or how the internet mayandfiltercontributing to increased polarizationbepluralism, by allowingandreducedengage only with content theyindividualstowith. agreeShould we suspend new or radical ideas6.judgment, for a grace period, untilfrompeople have had a chance to considermorethem?To what extent do you agree that an7.of the Overton window is a signexpansionTo what extent is it unethical for politicians8.thought leaders to support ideasandpolicies that they do not believe in,andthe goal of expanding or shifting thewithIf you had the influence, what ideas would9.bring into the Overton window?youTo what extent has the internet, through10.media and online discussionsocialchanged the nature of publicgroups,and the Overton window?discourse2groups too.interrogate that perspective in I.1.focus on shifting the window of possibilities,For discussionwindow is?why not?of progress?we achieve that?window of public discourse?journalists, influencers and politicians.(a)(b)What may have caused this?30
- Page 1 and 2: THEORY OFO X F O R D I B D I P L O
- Page 3 and 4: University Press is a department of
- Page 5 and 6: ContentsCORE THEMEOPTIONAL THEMESiv
- Page 7 and 8: lucky circumstance brings you to th
- Page 9 and 10: I. Scopecan seem abstract, intimida
- Page 11 and 12: I. Scopeis complicated by power and
- Page 13 and 14: I. ScopeWhat factors limit our know
- Page 15 and 16: I. ScopeII. PerspectivesTOK we exam
- Page 17 and 18: II. Perspectivesmay have inherited
- Page 19 and 20: II. Perspectivesto Quassim Cassam,
- Page 21 and 22: III. Methods and toolsterms: NYT Ne
- Page 23 and 24: III. Methods and toolsof it? What m
- Page 25 and 26: III. Methods and toolsIV. Ethics(b)
- Page 27 and 28: IV. Ethicsin TOK is about the explo
- Page 29 and 30: Knowledgeand politics 2is concerned
- Page 31 and 32: I. Scopehas been great concern, esp
- Page 33 and 34: I. Scopeadministrative systems, had
- Page 35: I. Scopethis book we engage with th
- Page 39 and 40: II. Perspectivesopposed to scientif
- Page 41 and 42: II. Perspectivesobjective “fact o
- Page 43 and 44: II. Perspectives7 deals with public
- Page 45 and 46: II. Perspectiveshe adds, ‘It wasn
- Page 47 and 48: II. Perspectivesargued that interne
- Page 49 and 50: II. Perspectivesmedia users report
- Page 51 and 52: III. Methods and toolsLorde said yo
- Page 53 and 54: III. Methods and toolsShould we tes
- Page 55 and 56: III. Methods and toolsend of the po
- Page 57 and 58: III. Methods and toolsIV. Ethicsthe
- Page 59 and 60: IV. Ethicsoffence enters the pictur
- Page 61 and 62: IV. Ethicsenabled by technology. Pr
- Page 63 and 64: IV. Ethicsa 2018 article for the Ne
- Page 65 and 66: Knowledgeand technology 3does it me
- Page 67 and 68: I. Scopereach of human-made objects
- Page 69 and 70: I. Scopeterms:SearchSubmarineTelege
- Page 71 and 72: section explores what we know about
- Page 73 and 74: 3.5a shows Margaret Hamilton,Figure
- Page 75 and 76: II. Perspectivesterms: How weSearch
- Page 77 and 78: the challenges outlined in the disc
- Page 79 and 80: 2013 a team of researchers publishe
- Page 81 and 82: III. Methods and toolsAccuracy (sel
- Page 83 and 84: that object is a black hole, from w
- Page 85 and 86: IV. Ethicsand when those who stand
7, section II, explores AIDS public health
Chapter
in South Africa. Chapter 9, section II, looks at
policy
work of expert commissions between countries
the
resolve conicting histories. Comparing these
to
what is the role of politics and how does it
examples,
the credibility and authority of experts?
aect
confidence in the fact that TOK is not
Take
in exploring issues of expertise and
alone
knowledge. Questions about these issues
public
fundamental to protecting the citizen’s
are
issues are discussed by people and
Political
with various levels of power; they share
groups
opinions, make claims with various degrees
their
confidence and make judgments about the
of
and validity of other perspectives. This
reliability
the public discourse. How can you
characterizes
different perspectives? How aware are
evaluate
of the forces that have shaped your political
you
What would be sufficiently convincing
views?
change your mind? As we proceed, recall the
to
in Chapter 1 on intellectual humility
discussions
II.2) and thinking patterns and habits (in III.1).
(in
shapes depending on the context and
different
constraints. If you are curious about what
the
discussion looks like elsewhere, follow
this
link to an excellent conversation on public
the
and the forces that shape it. Hear
knowledge
Amita Baviskar, from the Institute of
from
Growth in New Delhi, and Rifka
Economic
from the University of Strasbourg
Weehuizen,
for Advanced Study. They discuss
Institute
expert and layperson knowledge can
how
integrated into a relationship based on
be
values and participation.
democratic
terms: public knowledge
Search
objectivity and
academic
smart way to keep people passive and obedient
The
to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion,
is
allow very lively debate within that spectrum—
but
encourage the more critical and dissident views.
even
gives people the sense that there’s free thinking
That
on, while all the time the presuppositions of the
going
are being reinforced by the limits put on the
system
of the debate.
range
II. Perspectives
I. Scope
II. Perspectives
Making connections
Politics in science and history
voice in government, and the answers take
teaching profit motivation
I I . P E R S P E C T I V E S
II.1 The Overton window
(Chomsky 1998)
29