GET OUT YOUR NOTEBOOKS, BOYS AND GIRLS, AND FASTEN YOUR SEATBELTS…… IT’S GOING TO BE A BUMPY COUPLE OF WEEKS! WELCOME TO THE PRESCRIBED TITLES!

Examiners mark essays against the title as set Examiners mark essays against the title as set. Respond to the title exactly as given; do not alter it in any way. Your essay must be between 1200 and 1600 words in length, double spaced and typed in size 12 font.

It is absolutely vital that the introduction to a TOK essay establishes clearly why the approach the student is taking is relevant to the title.

Schools are asked to observe the following requests in order to assist with the assessment process: Ensure that candidates use a spacing of at least 1.5 and a font size of 12 Use a standard font such as Times New Roman or Arial Use default-sized margins without any added border Write the prescribed title at the start of the essay as stated on the list Take note of the limits of the word requirement for the TOK essay - the actual word-count must be entered when the essay is uploaded.

Students need to find examples beyond what we've already processed in class. It will be hard to score high (or so I've been told) on the criterion "Knower's Perspective," which values "independent thinking," if it seems like you've simply trotted out examples that either come from class or from any of the TOK textbooks or course companions that are out there.

Such as…. Hitler, Stalin, Nazi Propaganda, Darwin, Copernicus etc Such as…. Hitler, Stalin, Nazi Propaganda, Darwin, Copernicus etc. What else is cliché or overused?

'Does the candidate present an appropriate and cogent analysis of knowledge questions in discussing the title?'

If you want to use examples from Psychology in a ToK essay then you should be studying Psychology. Otherwise you are more likely to end up 'shooting from the hip'. Write about that with which you are familiar.

I am limited in what I can do for you I am limited in what I can do for you. 'providing a candidate with undue assistance in the production of any work that contributes to the assessment requirements of the Diploma Programme' constitutes a breach of regulations. (HOP 2012, Sn A 8.6)

QUESTION 1

1. In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences?

Definitions: what is… “In what ways”? May? Disagreement? Aid? 1. In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences? Definitions: what is… “In what ways”? May? Disagreement? Aid? The pursuit? Knowledge?

What are the: Natural Sciences? Astronomy Biology Chemistry Physics Materials science Physics Earth science Atmospheric science Oceanography

Two Aok’s themselves. Can you add another? What are the: Human Sciences? It includes but is not necessarily limited to humanistic modes of inquiry within fields of the Social sciences Humanities Sociology Anthropology Economics History Separate AoK – Can you include it? In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences? Two Aok’s themselves. Can you add another?

History is one of the AOK's in the current TOK syllabus and not part of Human Sciences. I think it would not be a good idea to use disagreements in History. This is a ToK prescribed title, so we can be expected to follow ToK terminology. If students mention a disagreement between historians they will not be penalized for it, but there must be a "human science" from the ToK diagram too. Classifying AoK's is a knowledge issue in itself, but not useful in this particular case. The example of Newton vs. Einstein is actually not a case of "disagreement in pursuit of knowledge" demanded by the prescribed title. For physics much better would be Einstein and Bohr (at least they did meet to disagree). I would also take "too fast" neutrinos from more recent times. In ecology there are serious disagreements about anthropogenic global warming (the scientific disagreements, not political and the pseudoscientific parts, which are more aggressive). There are very vivid examples in palaeoanthropology (Johanson vs. Leakey), group selection vs. gene-centred view in evolution, etc. And there are even more disagreements in human sciences (e.g. schools of psychology), all either leading to further research or sometimes slowing the advance of knowledge. One approach I've taken is to bring up these "tried-and-true" examples myself in class as we are moving through units involving the Areas of Knowledge. This is not a bad approach from the standpoint of knowing something about intellectual or cultural history anyway, right? I mean, shouldn't an educated adult have some familiarity with some of the "tried-and-true"? And then I've warned students that they need to develop their own examples. What will an examiner probably conclude if half a dozen or so of you use the same extended example for Title X? They'll conclude that there must have been a day in class when this example was pretty thoroughly addressed. And, if they do, a lower score for independent thinking seems well justified.  

1. In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences? How has the presence of the disagreement actually assisted in the development of knowledge in each of these AoK?

1. In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences? Is a new discovery just a “disagreement” with earlier understanding? What is the difference?

Why are differences of opinion important? 1. In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences? Why are differences of opinion important?

1. In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences? Explain how both the natural sciences and the human sciences are based on inductive reasoning. Cite an example for each.

1. In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences? Remembering that both the natural sciences and the human sciences are based on inductive reasoning (and sometimes supported by the deductive reasoning of math) which means they are trusted by means of probability, why are differences of opinion important?

Why should we listen to others' perceptions/arguments? 1. In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences? Why should we listen to others' perceptions/arguments?

1. In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences? How has disagreement spurred further research, resulted in a new synthesis, etc.?

1. In what ways may disagreement aid the pursuit of knowledge in the natural and human sciences? Can disagreement in the pursuit of knowledge take centuries to develop? Do two scientists need to meet to disagree?