Theory of Knowledge - Course Companion for Students Marija Uzunova Dang Arvin Singh Uzunov Dang

meanings in different AOKs? Does
different
legitimacy of experts come from different
the
in different AOKs? It is not enough
sources
way of TOK analysis to say that different
by
happen in mathematics and history
things
they are different AOKs; that is
because
how you might engage with and
Consider
different points of view in this PT
evaluate
is no reason why we cannot link facts
“There
theories across disciplines and create
and
common groundwork of explanation.”
a
what extent do you agree with this
To
might notice that the title contains the
You
word “we”, and we discussed earlier
tricky
it is important and necessary to specify
why
it is referring to. In this specific title,
whom
can choose to answer the question with
you
to, for example, 1) experts and
reference
who produce knowledge, 2)
researchers
and communicators who disseminate
teachers
or 3) students and individuals
knowledge,
acquire and make sense of knowledge.
who
of these groups of knowers, and
Each
are likely to have different reasons
subgroups,
why we can or cannot “create a common
for
of explanation”. Notice how in
groundwork
the key term “we” you are inviting
specifying
perspectives into your essay. This is
different
else to keep in mind is that in an
Something
a raft of rhetorical questions is not a
essay
for analysis. Your analysis might raise
substitute
questions than it answers, but it must
more
Drawing conclusions that are of
II.4
consequence
you have done the work we talked about so
If
by this point you should be well placed to
far,
differences and, as we mentioned earlier,
their
Even if it is difficult to articulate,
similarities?
is still worth thinking about why it is that we
it
these different ways of coming to know
have
the world. Let’s see what this looks like
about
practice.
in
meaningful conclusion; the better you do
a
the more convincing the outcome of your
this
will be. In what context and at what
analysis
are you going to explore the linking of
level
PT in itself deals with multiple
This
various points of view
perspectives—the
exist across disciplines. Consider in
that
ways linking facts and theories across
which
from the same AOK (economics,
disciplines
and psychology, for example)
anthropology
differ from doing the same across
might
and mathematics. In your essay
history
should demonstrate awareness of the
you
and differences between and
similarities
AOKs, as well as the source of those
within
and differences. What might
similarities
the source? Consider what role having a
be
set of methods and tools, or having a
similar
main pitfall you are going to want to
The
here is generalizing perspectives at
avoid
level of AOKs, uncritically presenting
the
as monoliths; for example, “in the
disciplines
your essay meaningfully. Below we
conclude
what that could look like.
discuss
conclusions should leave the reader—and
The
a sense of having got somewhere
you—with
the end of your essay. In other words, we
at
not be back exactly where we started,
should
come full circle, to conclude that “it
having
or that it is true “to some extent”. We
depends”
that already, and 1600 words later, ideally
knew
would know a bit more. By the time you
we
II. THE ESSAY
12
obvious. What can you say about the source of
from the May 2015 session.
facts and theories?
statement?
shared set of assumptions, plays in this PT.
arts we see X, while in the sciences we see Y.”
an important step towards being able to draw
answer some.
373