Personally in my own presentation, what i discovered when doing research is that some TOK questions just simply do not have a concrete right or wrong answer. A lot of TOK comes from personal experience and opinion while examing the influence of culture and other opinions on the subject matter. For example, Erin and i had to define the difference between feeling and emotions and when looking through doctors answers on the same matter there was one account from a doctor who answered "*laughs* i have no idea". This account was listed between many differed and conflicting answers which offered a great vareity of opinions on the matter. We managed to eke out a general definition of the difference but this was a very basic form of the answer.
A popular presentation factor was to ask the audience their opinion on the answer of the question. I believe it was popular and effective because it highlighted how many different answers there are to just one question, how there can be complex answers and simple answers, how people can have radically different opinions on the same view and that mostly each question was subject to logic as well as personal opinion.
I think that in TOK as long as a person is able to justify their answer then we cannot dismiss their opinion even if it differs from the answer we had reached. Ethics, emotion, reason, etc are not concepts which have exact duplicate formulas or facts involved in them. Thus, careful research to reach a balanced answer is the best way to go when dealing with a TOK issue.
Monday, April 12, 2010
Monday, March 15, 2010
EQ Test
After taking the advised EQ test from the TOK wikispace i received the result "above average". i then re-took the test and got the same score. The people next to me also got the same result. I do not believe this is a very reliable test. Afterall, it was not very long oor detailed. The questions are vague and in no way is it personalized. I think an EQ test would be best carried out by an individual who has knowledge on the subject and can apply the questions to the testee.
The test focussed both on outward and inward empathy and awareness. It was through these questions that i realised that if you take a step ack from the bsituation the problem ceases to have the same impact and importance it previously held. I learned from this test that sometimes it is good to take a step back, a deep breath and remind yourself that life does not revolve around this problem.
I think i may take a different online test, or maybe two and see how the results compare. This test was chosen for its suitability for school so i shall take a couple more detailed tests outside of school and see if the result changes significantly.
The test focussed both on outward and inward empathy and awareness. It was through these questions that i realised that if you take a step ack from the bsituation the problem ceases to have the same impact and importance it previously held. I learned from this test that sometimes it is good to take a step back, a deep breath and remind yourself that life does not revolve around this problem.
I think i may take a different online test, or maybe two and see how the results compare. This test was chosen for its suitability for school so i shall take a couple more detailed tests outside of school and see if the result changes significantly.
Monday, February 1, 2010
Camels and Nessie (Reasoning and Logic)
Camel Wash
I'd like to belive the article on the Al Qaeda terrorists as i think it would be fitting of them to be reduced to such methods. However, i find it highly unlikely and think that the tone of the article does not convey enough seriousness in respect to the gravity of the situation. The article reads like one big joke which is not appropriate to such a sensitive topic such as terrorism. Thus, i do not believe the article as it is for entertainment purposes. The evidence is unverifiable and i think the point of the article was just to give the media some relief from the usual doom and gloom articles on terrorists.
Loch Ness Monster
It's real. She exists. As a Scot, you can take my word on it. I've been there, she was sleeping when i went but i would just like to clarify that yes she is real.
As for the article i would say that i do believe this mans account. It is so typical of life to present someone with a kodak moment when they do not have a camera, i find it particularly believable that a guy with a camera had just life because, to put it simply, c'est la vie. This guy is not trying too hard to convince his listeners, he is content with knowing the truth for himself thus i find him more sincere.
I guess "correct reasoning" would be applying facts, logic and method to an unknown in order to produce the likeliest, plausible outcome.
A good argument would be a point which is being proved beyond any doubt with evidence. It has been approached from all angles and is logical and plausible. A bad argument, on the contrary, would have no or little followable thought process behind it, have obscure reasoning and only address a narrow band of possibilities.
Well, a flaw of reasoning is that with different facts, opinions and life experience, many different conclusions could be reached. It is very much dependant on the person applying it. Some people are more open minded than others, people have a range of beliefs.
Oops i just realised that the document was showing what logic attempts to do not asking me to answer questions. Moving on...
Deductive logic -
All girls have long hair
I am a girl
I have long hair.
Inductive logic -
Uhmmm, when i was a little girl i went to a tiny primary school where. to my knowledge, the teachers had been teachers for their entire working career. When i got to high school i discovered that some people had had careers in other areas of work other than teaching. I had applied information and reasoning to a situation i was familiar with and came up with the wrong conclusion, this is inductive logic.
I'd like to belive the article on the Al Qaeda terrorists as i think it would be fitting of them to be reduced to such methods. However, i find it highly unlikely and think that the tone of the article does not convey enough seriousness in respect to the gravity of the situation. The article reads like one big joke which is not appropriate to such a sensitive topic such as terrorism. Thus, i do not believe the article as it is for entertainment purposes. The evidence is unverifiable and i think the point of the article was just to give the media some relief from the usual doom and gloom articles on terrorists.
Loch Ness Monster
It's real. She exists. As a Scot, you can take my word on it. I've been there, she was sleeping when i went but i would just like to clarify that yes she is real.
As for the article i would say that i do believe this mans account. It is so typical of life to present someone with a kodak moment when they do not have a camera, i find it particularly believable that a guy with a camera had just life because, to put it simply, c'est la vie. This guy is not trying too hard to convince his listeners, he is content with knowing the truth for himself thus i find him more sincere.
I guess "correct reasoning" would be applying facts, logic and method to an unknown in order to produce the likeliest, plausible outcome.
A good argument would be a point which is being proved beyond any doubt with evidence. It has been approached from all angles and is logical and plausible. A bad argument, on the contrary, would have no or little followable thought process behind it, have obscure reasoning and only address a narrow band of possibilities.
Well, a flaw of reasoning is that with different facts, opinions and life experience, many different conclusions could be reached. It is very much dependant on the person applying it. Some people are more open minded than others, people have a range of beliefs.
Oops i just realised that the document was showing what logic attempts to do not asking me to answer questions. Moving on...
Deductive logic -
All girls have long hair
I am a girl
I have long hair.
Inductive logic -
Uhmmm, when i was a little girl i went to a tiny primary school where. to my knowledge, the teachers had been teachers for their entire working career. When i got to high school i discovered that some people had had careers in other areas of work other than teaching. I had applied information and reasoning to a situation i was familiar with and came up with the wrong conclusion, this is inductive logic.
Monday, January 4, 2010
Belief and Certainty
Belief - information which a person trusts to be true without evidence.
Certainty - indisputable, lacking any doubt that something is true.
Belief allows for there to be bias and a broader scope for outcomes.
Certainty is cold hard fact and cannot be argued.
People can be certain in their beliefs.
The main difference between the two is that there is indisputable physical evidence for certainty.
Therefore we can use these terms to distinguish between a fact that a person cannot argue against and a theory which a person trusts without evidence.
Many beliefs are backed by emotional or spiritual evidence which is not tanglible and impossible to verify.
Beliefs and certainty sometimes contradict each other (we have so far found no other life forms in the galaxy yet some people believe in aliens) so just because a certainty can be supported with evidence does not mean it is the stronger argument of the two concepts.
Certainty - indisputable, lacking any doubt that something is true.
Belief allows for there to be bias and a broader scope for outcomes.
Certainty is cold hard fact and cannot be argued.
People can be certain in their beliefs.
The main difference between the two is that there is indisputable physical evidence for certainty.
Therefore we can use these terms to distinguish between a fact that a person cannot argue against and a theory which a person trusts without evidence.
Many beliefs are backed by emotional or spiritual evidence which is not tanglible and impossible to verify.
Beliefs and certainty sometimes contradict each other (we have so far found no other life forms in the galaxy yet some people believe in aliens) so just because a certainty can be supported with evidence does not mean it is the stronger argument of the two concepts.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Knowledge is Justified Belief
If i say that i think that aliens are real, this does not make it a fact. Truth is independant of what people think is true because truth is fact and people do not always base decisions on fact, especially when there is no available evidence.
Knowing something is typically a trait of living beings. A computer cannot know something because it has no mind of its own to make a conscious decision to believe the information it holds.
a - certain
b - certain
c - probable
d - probable
e - possible
f - certain
g - possible
h - possible
Knowing something is typically a trait of living beings. A computer cannot know something because it has no mind of its own to make a conscious decision to believe the information it holds.
a - certain
b - certain
c - probable
d - probable
e - possible
f - certain
g - possible
h - possible
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)