tok essay questions 2023

IB ToK Essay Titles and Topics: May 2023

Here are links to ideas and suggestions relating to the the six May 2023 IB ToK Essay topics:

• Topic 1. Is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.
• Topic 2. For artists and natural scientists, which is more important: what can be explained or what cannot be explained? Discuss with reference to the arts and the natural sciences.
• Topic 3. Does it matter if our acquisition of knowledge happens in "bubbles" where some information and voices are excluded? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.
• Topic 4. Do you agree that it is "astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power" (Bertrand Russell)? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.
• Topic 5. Are visual representations always helpful in the communication of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics.
• Topic 6. To what extent is the knowledge we produce determined by the methodologies we use? Discuss with reference to history and one other area of knowledge.

Title 1: Is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

Thoughts to consider with essay 1 include:

• the distinction between necessary and sufficient requirements
• the relation between replicability and objectivity
• the relation between replicability and sharable perspectives

These thoughts, and others, will be developed here shortly: come back soon!

Title 2: For artists and natural scientists, which is more important: what can be explained or what cannot be explained? Discuss with reference to the arts and the natural sciences.

Thoughts to consider with essay 2 include:

• the relation between explicability and effability
• the limits of language and expressibility
• the relation between explanation, understanding and knowledge

Title 3: Does it matter if our acquisition of knowledge happens in "bubbles" where some information and voices are excluded? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

Thoughts to consider with essay 3 include:

• can there be purely subjective knowledge?
• can there be purely objective knowledge?
• what is required to share another's perspective?

Title 4: Do you agree that it is "astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power" (Bertrand Russell)? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Thoughts to consider with essay 4 include:

• the varieties or types of power
• is knowledge always inversely proportional to power
• could one have power without any knowledge?

Title 5: Are visual representations always helpful in the communication of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics.

Thoughts to consider with essay 5 include:

• the relevance of truth to representation
• the distinction between practical and theoretical knowledge
• is written language a visual representation?

Title 6: To what extent is the knowledge we produce determined by the methodologies we use? Discuss with reference to history and one other area of knowledge.

Thoughts to consider with essay 6 include:

• the difference between a method and a methodology
• can any knowledge be unmethodically?
• must a methodology be consciously deployed?
• 1. Is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.
• 2. For artists and natural scientists, which is more important: what can be explained or what cannot be explained? Discuss with reference to the arts and the natural sciences.
• 3. Does it matter if our acquisition of knowledge happens in "bubbles" where some information and voices are excluded? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.
• 4. Do you agree that it is "astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power" (Bertrand Russell)? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.
• 5. Are visual representations always helpful in the communication of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics.
• 6. To what extent is the knowledge we produce determined by the methodologies we use? Discuss with reference to history and one other area of knowledge.
• About Dr Phil Joyce
• Standard of Service
• Terms of Engagement

• Philosophy Degrees by Distance Learning
• Critical Thinking Tutor
• Oxbridge Application Tutor
• Logic Tutor
• University Philosophy Application Advice

This site is using cookies as specified in the cookies policy to track your preferences and activity.

• Our Writers

ToK Essay Prompts Demystified: Interpreting and Tackling 2023's Questions

Navigating the complex web of ToK essay prompts can feel like trying to decipher an ancient manuscript – it's challenging, yet deeply rewarding. Every year, the IB presents students with fresh, thought-provoking questions that aren’t just about showcasing your knowledge but also your ability to reason, reflect, and engage in intellectual play.

Now, 2023's prompts have landed, and you might be wondering: "How do I even begin to approach these?" Relax. It's normal to feel overwhelmed. However, understanding your prompt is the first (and perhaps most crucial) step towards crafting an essay that stands out. A well-interpreted prompt can be the foundation of a stellar essay, and that's what we're diving into today.

By the end of this guide, you’ll have a clearer vision of what these questions are really asking and how you can tackle them with confidence and creativity. Ready? Let’s demystify these prompts together!

The ABCs of ToK Essay Prompts

Understanding ToK essay prompts isn't just about reading the words. It's about delving deep into their meaning, intent, and the broader context they inhabit. Think of each prompt as a puzzle. At first glance, it might seem daunting, but each piece holds a clue to the bigger picture.

Why These Questions? The Intent Behind the Prompt

Every ToK essay prompt is meticulously crafted. The questions are designed to push you to reflect, reason, and develop an individual perspective on knowledge and how it interacts with the world. Remember, it's not just about answering the question but also about showcasing how you think and perceive the world of knowledge.

The Layers of a Prompt: Surface and Depth

On the surface, a ToK essay question may seem straightforward. But scratch a little deeper, and you'll uncover layers of meaning. Each prompt comes with its set of nuances, undertones, and subtleties. It's your job to unearth these layers, interpret them, and mold your essay around your unique understanding.

Flexing Your Interpretative Muscles

Interpreting a ToK prompt isn't much different from analyzing a poem or a piece of art. There's no singular 'correct' way to approach it. Multiple interpretations can coexist, and your perspective is just as valid as any other, provided it's well-reasoned and backed by thoughtful reflection. Remember, the IB isn't looking for a 'right answer' but rather, they want to witness the journey of your thought process.

2023's ToK Essay Prompts: A Closer Look

Alright, champions of knowledge! The much-awaited 2023 ToK essay questions are here. Let's unpack these thought-provoking challenges that await your intellectual prowess:

The Role of Replicability : Is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge? Dive into the depths of this question, referencing two areas of knowledge and unveiling the significance of reproducibility in our understanding of the world.

Artists vs. Natural Scientists : For artists and natural scientists, which is more crucial: what can be explained or what cannot be? Delve into the contrasting yet intertwined worlds of arts and the natural sciences. How do explanation and mystery influence these fields?

Knowledge in Bubbles : Does it matter if our acquisition of knowledge happens in "bubbles" where some information and voices are excluded? Explore the implications and consequences of receiving knowledge in isolated silos. What do we gain, and what might we be missing out on?

The Paradox of Power : Do you agree with Bertrand Russell's assertion that it is "astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power"? Dive into the dynamic realm of the natural sciences and another area of knowledge to reflect upon the immense power that even a sliver of understanding can bestow upon us.

The Visual Aid Dilemma : Are visual representations always helpful in the communication of knowledge? Challenge or defend the use of visuals in the expansive territories of the human sciences and mathematics. How do visuals shape, aid, or potentially hinder our understanding?

Methodologies and Outcomes : To what extent is the knowledge we produce determined by the methodologies we use? Take a journey through history and another area of knowledge to discern the profound influence of methodologies on our comprehension of the past and the world around us.

Phew! Talk about a brainstorming marathon! Remember, while these prompts may initially seem dense, each one is a golden opportunity to showcase your unique perspective on knowledge. The journey might be challenging, but the rewards – oh, they're worth every ounce of effort.

Delving Deeper into Select Prompts

While all of the 2023 ToK essay prompts are a treasure trove of intellectual exploration, let's zoom in and dissect a few of them a bit more, shall we? This deep dive will provide a clearer understanding, perhaps sparking that ‘aha’ moment for your own essay.

The Role of Replicability in Knowledge Production

Overview : This topic challenges us to reflect on the importance of replicability in research and knowledge generation. But why is it significant? Think of scientific experiments. If a result can be consistently replicated, it bolsters its credibility.

Possible Angle : Contrast the natural sciences, where replicability is often a cornerstone, with another area of knowledge where it might not hold as much weight. For instance, in the arts, is a replicated piece as valuable as an original?

Knowledge in Bubbles - A Double-Edged Sword?

Overview : The modern age, with its vast array of information platforms, often sees us in echo chambers, where we hear opinions and facts that align with our own views. But what's the consequence of such selective knowledge acquisition?

Possible Angle : Evaluate the pros and cons. For instance, while these bubbles can strengthen community ties and provide tailored knowledge, are they also breeding grounds for misinformation or limiting broader understanding?

The Paradox of Power in Knowledge

Overview : Bertrand Russell's assertion highlights a profound observation – sometimes, even a little knowledge can yield immense power. But is this always a good thing?

Possible Angle : Reflect on historical instances where limited knowledge led to significant consequences, both positive and negative. Additionally, ponder on the ethical implications when wielding such power.

Remember, these prompts are meant to stimulate your thinking, not restrict it. Let your creativity flow. Dive deep, challenge assumptions, and most importantly, enjoy the intellectual journey. If at any point you find yourself hitting a roadblock, revisit our previous guide on mastering the ToK essay for some inspiration and direction.

General Strategies for Approaching ToK Essay Prompts

Alright, young scholars, having taken a closer look at a few of the prompts, it’s time to arm you with some universal strategies to tackle any ToK essay topic. Whether you’re addressing the role of replicability or diving into knowledge bubbles, these strategies are your trusted companions:

Begin with an Open Mind : Before taking a stance, allow yourself to explore both sides of the argument. This not only provides depth to your essay but showcases your ability to evaluate diverse perspectives.

Connect to Real-Life Situations : Anecdotes and real-world examples make your essay relatable and tangible. They serve as evidence of your claims and breathe life into abstract ideas.

Interlink Areas of Knowledge (AoK) : While the prompt may specify certain AoKs, don’t be afraid to draw connections to others if relevant. This showcases your holistic understanding and makes for an enriched argument.

Mind the WoKs (Ways of Knowing) : Whether it’s perception, emotion, reason, or language, remember that WoKs can offer unique angles and insights into your essay topic. Weave them in where appropriate.

Engage with Counterclaims : A well-rounded essay isn't just about asserting your perspective but recognizing and addressing counterarguments. This not only strengthens your position but exhibits critical thinking.

Stay Structured : While the ToK essay encourages deep thinking, remember that clarity is crucial. Use a clear introduction, body, and conclusion. Organize your thoughts systematically to guide the reader seamlessly through your arguments.

Personalize Your Insights : Remember, the ToK essay is a reflection of your intellectual journey. While you'll rely on experts and sources, don’t forget to interject with your personal insights, experiences, and reflections.

Revisit and Revise : First drafts are called 'first' for a reason. Once you've penned down your initial thoughts, take a break, return with fresh eyes, and refine your essay. This iterative process can be a game-changer in elevating the quality of your piece.

Now, with these strategies in hand, you're better equipped to face the ToK essay head-on. Remember, it's as much about the journey of exploration as it is about the final piece. Enjoy the process, relish the challenges, and if ever in doubt, our earlier guide is just a click away for some quick wisdom.

Final Tips for Tackling the ToK Essay Head-On

Alright, we've traversed the vast landscape of ToK essay prompts, delved deep into some of them, discussed strategies, and even looked into multimedia resources. But before you embark on your essay-writing journey, here are a few last-minute nuggets of wisdom to carry with you:

Stay Original : While it's great to gather insights and understand the general perspective on topics, always ensure your voice shines through. Adjudicators value originality and authenticity.

Seek Feedback : It's always a good idea to have someone else, be it a peer, teacher, or mentor, take a look at your essay. They might offer a perspective or insight that you hadn't considered.

Stay Within the Word Limit : It might seem challenging, but condensing your thoughts and being concise is key. Straying far from the word limit might make your essay seem unfocused.

Relax and Trust Yourself: Believe in your capabilities. Remember, this essay is as much about the journey of exploration as it is about the end product.

The Theory of Knowledge essay can indeed seem like a mammoth task. With multiple layers of interpretation and areas of knowledge to consider, the process can be daunting. But with the right strategies, resources, and mindset, it's a challenge you can certainly overcome.

And hey, if ever the waters seem too rough, remember you're not alone. Whether you need to go back to the basics with writing ToK essay or require hands-on assistance, there's always help at hand with IB writing service .

Last edit at Aug 15 2023

Share this article

IB Tutor and Writer

With over a decade in the educational realm, Henrik has guided countless IB students towards academic excellence. Combining a deep understanding of the IB curriculum with practical strategies, Henrik is committed to making challenging subjects approachable and essays memorable.

• Buy ToK Essay Online
• Buy Extended Essay
• Buy ToK Exhibition
• Buy Math IA
• Our writers
• Testimonials

Connect with us

• Privacy Policy
• Money Back Policy
• Cookies Policy
• Revision Policy
• Terms and Conditions
• Acceptable Use Policy
• Anti-Plagiarism and Anti-AI Policy

* The services we provide are designed to assist clients by offering a guideline.

* The products delivered should be utilized strictly for research or study purposes.

© 2024 IBHelper.com. All rights reserved.

this website is owned and operated by rrkn research holdings ltd. Ifigeneias 14 , 3036 , Limassol , Cyprus

November 2023 TOK Essay Prompts Explained + SAMPLES

Table of contents

• Writing Metier

The TOK essay prescribed titles for November 2023 are finally out. Since many students struggle with TOK essays, it’s quite good news that IB students have a lot of time to check those TOK prompts.

Psssss…it’s time to check November 2024 TOK essay titles .

No more general words, and dry theory, I’m sharing a list of the TOK titles. I will start with a general list and move further to detailed explanations of each and give you examples. This can help you understand which one you will go for.

Moreover, I believe this can help you get started so that you know what exactly is required of you to work. 

November 2023 ToK essay titles list

• Are facts alone enough to prove a claim? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.
• If “the mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s and the poet’s, must be beautiful” (G.H. Hardy), how might this impact the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.
• In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.
• Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.
• Is it always the case that “the world isn’t just the way I is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it” (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.
• Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

If you need assistance with your IB ToK essay , press on the picture above and order your paper. Now let’s move to the explanation part.

Title 1: Are facts alone enough to prove a claim? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

This seems to be one of the easiest prompts to work on. But in some cases, when things seem too simple, there is a lot that has to go behind that. The keyword in this case is ‘facts.’ The title asks if facts alone are enough to help prove a claim. Another word that also needs to be focused on is ‘alone.’ The idea is to explore if only facts can help you prove a claim or if there are other factors that are needed as well. 

 A lot of us think that we know what ‘facts’ stand for. In some fields of interest, like math, it is very easy to chalk out what facts are. Say one plus one is two, is a fact in mathematics. But how does one decide what facts are in areas of knowledge like arts and human sciences?

These areas of knowledge are subjective in nature, which means that it can be very hard to differentiate facts in these areas of knowledge. Every area of knowledge that we talk about has a different way of classifying facts.

For example, when we talk about math, we can see that the Pythagorean theorem is based on hard facts, where we talk about how the summation of the square of the base and the perpendicular equals to the sum of the hypotenuse. So we can see that while facts are indeed sufficient in some areas of knowledge , there is indeed more probing needed in other areas of knowledge to help understand things better.

Sample of November 2023 TOK Essay Title 1

Below you can find an example of the November 2023 TOK essay sample on Prompt 1: Are facts alone enough to prove a claim?

To understand this better, it is highly advised that you also go through the different stages of knowledge that exist to help you understand how knowledge is produced here. Does it come solely from facts, or do you also need other types of evidence to help you reach a reasonable conclusion about things? 

Title 2: If “the mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s and the poet’s, must be beautiful” (G.H. Hardy), how might this impact the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.

This title is very specific. Actually, I’m finding it super confusing and I guess it will be one of the less-selected November 2023 TOK prompts. Agree? Leave your comments below 😉

It is one that talks about the importance of math and how contrary to popular belief, it shares characteristics that are very similar to arts. Many a time, you must have heard that math is a very creative discipline on the whole. The idea behind this concept is that while the subject is highly objective, it does take into account many different factors, and all of these factors are ones that need to be taken into consideration when we talk about this.

One interesting example that we can see here is the concept of fractals. If you read up more about this, then you will find out that this has a lot to do with the artistic representation of mathematics. This raises a very valid question, which is whether art has only to do with how beautiful something is or is there more to it as well. 

On the contrary, we can also see that there is a lot of evidence that shows that art is not all about being pretty. There is a lot more to it as well. An example can be seen in terms of the paintings and photographs that depict famous wars that happened in the world. While these aren’t pretty pictures, they are pretty much valid and prevalent, and they really help us understand more about different situations in terms of what we think or believe about them.

So the idea is to explore that does mathematics really have any value is the knowledge is produced but does not add any value? So if you go for this prompt, then you have to dispute the notion of this quote, giving your own two cents to the situation to actually explore what this is all about and how you can work your way toward things in the best possible way. 

Title 3: In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Many students would find this title very appealing. The idea here is to explore to what extent exactly can we trust experts in any field to give us information about things so that we can base our behavior on them. The best way we can look at this is with the help of the Coronavirus pandemic that took the world over by storm.

Health experts told us that we have to get ourselves vaccinated and stay at home for our own safety and the safety of our loved ones. We did exactly so because we realized that this was the best thing to do for people because we trust experts in terms of the knowledge that they have and the advice that they give us about things. 

But what is also important to note here is that experts are not always right. They can also go wrong based on what they think and also have it in them to make mistakes. So this raises a very important question, which is what makes an expert?

So the idea is to explore this in a lot of detail. It would be very interesting to explore this with reference to human sciences, because the nature of the subject is highly subjective, which means that it can help understand what all it constitutes. You can explore this better by looking at what economists have to say about different situations and how that seems to be wise or not.

This is a very interesting prompt if you choose to go about it wisely and have sound examples to support your viewpoint about things. 

Title 4: Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

This is a very interesting prompt to work on if you take into account the fact that knowledge is produced according to the values of producers. We need to work toward understanding what the main problem is and how knowledge is influenced by different values.

Let’s look at this with the example of slavery. There was a point in time when people didn’t see anything wrong with slavery. They knew that slavery is prevalent and at that time, it was also very common to have slaves. But if we look at how problematic this is today, then you can see that no one takes into account slavery today. In fact, it is looked upon as something that is extremely bad.

So what we can see here is that the knowledge that we have is greatly influenced by different thought processes that make us understand things a certain way. The value system that we rely on here is something very important that we have to take into account if we wish to work a certain way. 

At the end of the day, the knowledge that you have is dependent on what all you have learned so far and what this has taught you. Your lens might become outdated in the future,  but the idea is to help you understand all of this in a much better way. An accurate depiction of things can only happen when you take all of that into account and try to understand things for the better. For some areas of knowledge, the issue of values is not very prominent, while for others, that is not the case.

So it depends entirely on what you choose to work with and how you think that affects the way that you think and work toward things. 

Title 5: Is it always the case that “the world isn’t just the way it is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it” (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.

While this prompt may seem to be a little complicated at first, it is not really that hard to understand. In simple words, you are expected to work toward bringing your own perspective and interpretation of knowledge. It asks you how you understand things and how your interpretation of things makes you add value to the world. The idea here is that all of us have our own thoughts and ideas about things. The knowledge that we acquire is very different, and our value systems are very different as well. So this is something that we have to explore and try to understand in all ways. There is also a very wide spectrum that makes you understand what it means to bring something to the things that you learn. 

With some areas of knowledge, this can be very easy to explain. Say if you talk about art, you can see how artists have their own thought processes when they paint a picture. Even if we talk about an abstract painting, we can see that there is a lot that goes behind all of that, and the main reason for that is that they have a specific thought process that they follow. But how we interpret that painting depends entirely on what our lookout toward things is.

So this is what we need to understand very well. So basically, how well you explore this prompt depends on the type of examples that you come through with and what all you help explain in the best way. So this is something that is very important and is something that you need to pay a lot of attention to, when working. 

Title 6: Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

This title basically talks about big data and how there is so much information in the world that we actually find very hard to understand. You might have experienced a lot of this in your entire student life. When there is too much that you have to understand and study, it becomes really hard for you to retain all of that.

So the idea is to understand what information you will actually understand and retain, and what you will not. The idea is to know that some information is more valuable than others, so you have to be very mindful about what you think and do in this situation. 

Similarly, in the real work, there is a lot of information that we have in front of us. It depends entirely on us what we choose to pick out as more important, depending on what our world view is and what we think is important for the acquisition of knowledge. Search engines have also given us access to so much information that it actually becomes very hard for us to pick and choose what we want to pay the most attention to.

TOK Essay Title 6 Example

Below you will find a link to the November 2023 TOK essay prompt 6 – Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge?

When we choose some knowledge, and we miss out on some other, it gives us a feeling of whether we are missing out on something important. So the idea is to understand this best and think about what interests us the most so that we can pick and choose very wisely. 

Other TOK essay prompts from previous years with samples

In case you have overlooked any of the past TOK essay titles, along with their examples or topics from previous years, I am providing the links below.

The year 2023:

• May 2023 TOK essay titles

The year 2022:

• November 2022 TOK essay prompts
• May 2022 ToK essay titles

Previous years’ prompts:

• November 2021 ToK Essay titles
• May 2021 Theory of Knowledge essay prompts

Ready to select your 2023 November TOK essay prompt?

With a better idea of what you have to touch upon in each of these, it will become much easier for you to choose things so that you understand all of it better and make a very wise choice. 

You can always count on our service if you need assistance writing your TOK essay. Simply get in touch with our support team or place your order directly to buy TOK essay using our online order form.

Free topic suggestions

Vasy kafidoff.

Vasyl Kafidoff is a co-founder and CEO at WritingMetier. He is interested in education and how modern technology makes it more accessible. He wants to bring awareness about new learning possibilities as an educational specialist. When Vasy is not working, he’s found behind a drum kit.

Similar posts

Ib tok ppd form. a guide to achieving success.

Discover the power of IB TK PPD and how it can help you succeed in the IBDP. This comprehensive guide covers everything you need to know about IB TK PPD and how it can help you unlock your full potential. Learn how to apply these powerful strategies to improve your performance and reach your goals. Read now and start your journey to success with IB TK PPD

IB ToK Essay Prompts for November 2022

Every year, students who started IBDP are waiting for IB to share the list of specific prescribed titles for Theory of Knowledge essays. Like in all the previous years, IB opened a list of six topics for TOK essays for the next semester.

May 2023 TOK Essay Prompts + SAMPLES and Suggestions

Every year, students anxiously wait for the IB to announce the TOK essay topics. So this year is not an exception; IBO has also announced 2023 May titles for IB TOK essay. In this article, we have provided the list of prompts with short directions and suggestions for each topic. Enjoy reading ;)

Real-Life Situation in IB TOK Essay | Choosing a RLS

One of the very important parts of the IB TOK essay is the real-life situation (also known as RLS). In this guide, you will learn about a real-life situation and how to choose one. This is a crucial part of a TOK essay, which means you must learn all about it before you start writing your essay!

TOK Essay PPF: The Insider's Guide to Acing Your Assessment

Get the inside scoop on how to ace your TOK (Theory of Knowledge) essay Planning and Progress Form (PPF) with our comprehensive guide. Our expert tips and tricks will help you craft a compelling and persuasive document that demonstrates your understanding of knowledge and its relationship to the real world.

TOK Exhibition Objects | List of 20+ Interesting Ideas

In the Theory of Knowledge exhibition, selecting the right object is crucial. Our curated list provides a diverse range of ideas, from historical artifacts to contemporary art and everyday items, all designed to spark deep reflection and meaningful connections.

We rely on cookies to give you the best experince on our website. By browsing, you agree to it. Read more

TOK DISCUSSIONS

Theory of knowledge prescribed titles

May 2023 examination session

Is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

For artists and natural scientists, which is more important: what can be explained or what cannot be explained? Discuss with reference to the arts and the natural sciences.

Does it matter if our acquisition of knowledge happens in “bubbles” where some information and voices are excluded? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

Do you agree that it is “astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power” (Bertrand Russell)? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Are visual representations always helpful in the communication of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics.

To what extent is the knowledge we produce determined by the methodologies we use? Discuss with reference to history and one other area of knowledge.

May 2023 Title #1

Is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge?

Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

“Replicability” means the quality of being able to replicate in general. And specifically, it applies to scientific experiments that need to be replicated. In simple words, a scientific experiment must be able to be done multiple times, under the same conditions, and produce the same results every single time.

As you noticed, “scientific experiment” is constantly being used. And this is a hint for you to know that if you want to choose this title for your TOK essay, you will have The Natural and Human Sciences as your AOKs. The other three remaining AOKs can be somehow chosen but without any amazing results. In the Arts, replicating an artwork makes it “fake,” “unauthentic,” and “worthless.” And if you think of the scientific process of authenticating an artwork by performing a scientific test, well, then firstly, it is science and not art anymore; secondly, that would be a one-time process, nothing to be replicated. In History, no experiments can be done, due to the nonexistence of “material;” and in Mathematics, this is out of the question.

Now that you know what your AOKs are you can think about the rest. The main keyword is “replicability,” which we already explained. However, there is another one crucial to the discussion; “necessary.” The title question asks whether replicability is “necessary” or “complementary?” Can a scientist conclude the results of an experiment after one or two times, and is the experiment being able to be replicated only an “extra mile?” Or is this a vital feature of any scientific experiment that cannot be avoided?

You know how things go in a biology lab. The results come out every time. And you are eager to want to see the same results regardless of the process and conditions. This is called “confirmation bias,” one of the biggest enemies of scientists.

You should introduce “replicability,” talk about its necessity and discuss the obstacles in the way; biases, hard-to-replicate conditions, price or scarcity of materials, and many more.

Things to avoid:

The usages of natural sciences in the process of knowledge production, or authentication in arts and history.

Over explanation of the scientific experiment rather the reason for the necessity of replicability.

Long introduction and conclusion parts.

Briefly introduce a scientific experiment and how scientists replicate it. Bring a personal example from your biology or chemistry lab experience. Find two contrasting real-life examples; one that the scientist replicated the experiment many times and produced solid scientific knowledge, and one that the scientist rushed the experiment or was biased toward their hypothesis/prediction and as a result, produced insufficient knowledge, one in human sciences and one in natural sciences (or if you have time and motivation, two for each). And compare those experiments and conclude that replicability is “necessary” (crucial) in natural sciences, and necessary but harder to achieve in human sciences.

May 2022 Title #2

Artists “explain” through expression, and natural scientists “explain” through words, charts, diagrams, etc. What the title question actually asks is not whether something can be explained or not, but the methods of explanation.

In the theme of “knowledge and language,” we learn that all ways of communication can be considered language, which is also used to explain. Artists “explain” their feelings, emotions, concepts, social issues, and many more concepts in their artworks. Song lyrics, as a form of literature, explain what artists went through during a period of their life. A painting explains beauty, horror, dignity, or poverty. Installations mostly explain the perception of space, and performance art tries to picture a social phenomenon. All these are artists’ attempts to “explain” something that cannot (easily) be explained through words, charts, numbers, or in any other “scientific” way. Therefore, artists choose to “express” rather than “explain.”

On the other than, scientists who are not dealing with creativity, choose more direct and evidential ways of communication. They try to bring facts and put them in numeral, statistical, and visual representations to “explain” a phenomenon.

And sometimes, a concept cannot be explained in any way, like love, faith, and emotional pain. This is artists’ call for action in knowledge production. In your personal life, many times you tried to explain a situation by hand gesture instead of talking. In team sports and army missions, the team leader explains the tactics or situation by gestures, as they cannot communicate with words.

Another big difference between artists’ and scientists’ ways of communication is in the consumption of knowledge. Artworks are usually open to interpretation. The audience understands the art in different ways based on how they interpret the “explanation” of the artist. Contrary to that, the results of scientists’ works, which are scientific publications, are rarely open to interpretations, at least not by ordinary people.

Discussing the arts and the natural sciences instead of artists and scientists. (Do not discuss the areas of knowledge. Discuss the expert knowers in these AOKs, who are artists and scientists.)

Over explanation of the story behind an artwork or a scientific process. (Focus your discussion on how the artist or the scientist “explained” in expressive or evidential ways.)

Introduce the “explained” and “unexplainable.” Bring a personal example from your life when you expressed with (or without) words, and compare it with the time you wrote a long explanation for a physics question. Find one real-life example from the arts, where the artistic expression was their way of explaining. And then find a real-life example in science, where the scientist extensively explains a phenomenon or a solution to a problem. If you have time and enthusiasm, you can bring two RLEs for each area of knowledge. In the end, conclude, by comparing your RLEs, that artists tend to find the “unexplained” more important, and for scientists, “explainables” are more important.

May 2023 Title #3

The answer is, “of course, it does.” However, this is not enough for a TOK essay.

In the core theme of “knowledge and the knower,” we learn about filter bubbles as one of the drawbacks of the Internet. But, what are filter “bubbles?”

Nowadays, the majority of people acquire knowledge (or better say information) from social media and internet websites. Social media distribute knowledge based on their algorithms to their subscribers. However, this distribution is only based on what the subscriber “likes” or what they might like. Imagine offering a range of snacks to a group of kids. Each kid chooses one; candy, snack bar, dried fruits, gummy bears, or chips. You continue giving each kid only the type of candy that they initially chose. In this way, they stay unaware of other snacks, and each kid continues to “believe” that his/her type of snack exists. Kids live in their own “snack bubble.”

The same thing happens when social media algorithms filter the information (knowledge) that we consume and keep us unaware of other things that happen in the world. You should also know that these “bubbles” are not a new phenomenon. For millennia rulers, governments, and people themselves kept individuals in information/knowledge bubbles for a variety of purposes.

Within the area of knowledge of history, the knower remains unaware of events and perspectives outside their “bubble.” They may even develop a misunderstanding about the scope of their history and culture, concluding that their culture is the most important or dominant one.

In The Human Sciences, the same bubble is formed around the knowledge of economics, anthropology, and human behavior.

In The Natural Sciences, filter bubbles make the person believe that the entire world suffers or deals with a pandemic the same way as their country (or their bubble).

Within The Arts, a knower inside a bubble shares the same values for artistic beauty without knowing that there are varieties of other values among other nations or groups.

And in Mathematics, you may think that all the advancements in this area of knowledge were the results of “your” mathematicians.

Gender equality, gender identity, religion, and diversity are the most common and controversial issues these days. Filter bubbles force an individual to believe that “everyone” on earth shares the same values and perspectives on a topic as theirs, and whoever thinks otherwise is “wrong” and should be “corrected” or “silenced.”

Confirmation bias is the basis for designing these bubbles. When “acquisition of knowledge happens in “bubbles” where some information and voices” (perspectives) “are excluded,” the knower acquires “selective knowledge” that feeds their confirmation bias and continue to search for more information that they find appropriate.

This way of knowledge acquisition creates self-serving bias. The knower only accepts the knowledge in their favor and rejects any opposing view, as they feel entitled to their points of view.

Attribution bias is another byproduct of “bubbles.” Assumptions, judgments, and labeling are the results of such bias that make the person attributes a presumed characteristic to a member of a group based on their mere association with that group.

You can also study more about conformity bias, gender bias, and response bias (social-desirability bias) to have a better understating of the effects of bubbles on research in different areas of knowledge.

Focusing on knowledge production. (You may find several examples of bubbles and biases in research studies. However, these examples can be discussed under the production of knowledge and not knowledge acquisition.)

Over explanation of a bubble instead of how the bubble affects our acquisition of knowledge.

Taking a side in your discussion pro or against a point of view. (Your language for your arguments should be as neutral as possible and shows your awareness of different points of view.)

Introduce and explain bubbles and how they form during our acquisition of knowledge (mostly by social media). Continue to briefly explain how bubbles affect our knowledge acquisition and perspectives. Choose a discipline from human sciences, and natural sciences or arts. History and mathematics can also be chosen as AOKs; however, developing arguments in these areas of knowledge needs vast knowledge and interest to masterfully discuss your real-life examples. Find one RLE for each AOK (or two for each if you have time and interest) and discuss “how” bubbles affected the way the knowers acquired knowledge. Conclude your essay by comparing real-life examples and conclude that while “it matters” if we acquire knowledge inside bubbles, the effects and consequences are different (less or more severe) in different areas of knowledge.

May 2023 Title #4

“We know very little, and yet it is astonishing that we know so much, and still more astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power,” is the complete quote.

Bertrand Russel was astonished by the contradictory nature of human knowledge and the disproportionate power that our little knowledge brings us. The title question, however, is focused on astonishment. Therefore, I must warn you from the beginning not to think about assessing the “correctness” of Russell’s perspective on knowledge. You may have different points of view on knowledge, power, and their relationship. But, I suggest you keep them to yourself.

It might be a stupid question to ask from a generation that was born into technology, which is one of the main symbols of the power of knowledge. Is it astonishing to you? Can anything astonish you? What do you find astonishing when it comes to human achievements? This is the question that guides you write your TOK essay.

The Natural Sciences is already chosen as one of the AOKs, and the reason is obvious; no other area of knowledge demonstrates the power of human knowledge like this one. It also makes your job easier. Based on the assumption you are astonished by human sciences (and all its glory), you can find another area of knowledge that is less, or more, astonishing and compare it with the first one.

Writing a TOK essay on this prescribed title is less challenging but personal. Because different people are amazed by different things and to different degrees. And as you will explore whether this disproportionate power comes from little knowledge, and the fact that we know a lot, yet still very little astonishes you or not, you have the right only to talk on your behalf; not any group or the entire human race. Therefore, it is a personal matter.

Some may suggest describing the power of knowledge and different “good” and “bad” applications of such power. It is highly recommended that you stick to the fact that knowledge gives us power and only focus on the level of fascination with such power.

Analyzing the quote. (Just accept the quote as true and discuss whether you can relate to it.)

Discussing in general, on behalf of your generation, or the human race.

Discussing Bertrand Russell’s background or his philosophy. (Stick to the point.)

Over explanation of technical details of a real-life example.

Start by directly talking about your relation to the quote. Choose your approach in choosing the second AOK; more or less astonishing. Find one real-life example for each AOK (or two for each if you have time and interest) that you really find interesting and mesmerizes you about how humanity could achieve such power (advancements). Conclude, based on your preference, whether you find these advancements astonishing. If so, which area of knowledge has been more successful? And if you find all the power that knowledge gives you “normal,” then explain the reason.

May 2023 Title #5

Are visual representations always helpful in the communication of knowledge?

Discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics.

When you see the adverb “always” in a title question, you should know that’s the first keyword. And the closest explanatory word is most probably the second one.

You must focus your discussions on whether something is always helpful or not. Therefore, discussing that “something” takes you off the path and you won’t receive a high mark.

What are “visual representations?” In the human sciences and mathematics, as the title demands, visual representations are images, charts, diagrams, graphs, shapes, lines, etc. These representations complement the knowledge that is being communicated. Are they “always” helpful in the communication of knowledge? This is the questions you should explore.

You can find real-life examples that support the (always) usefulness of visual representations in these two areas of knowledge. Or contrasting RLEs that show they are “sometimes” (or most of the time) useful. You do not want to bring all evidence against the usefulness of visual representations in the communication of knowledge because that is not true.

Using these representations has different degrees of importance in different disciplines of human sciences (whichever you are interested in). In psychology, usually, brain illustrations are used to help the audience understand how the brain functions. In social sciences, charts and graphs are commonly used as visual representations for the results of statistics and surveys alongside diagrams.

In economics, visual representation is a crucial element in the communication of knowledge. You can find many more examples in other disciplines of human sciences. In mathematics, most of the time, mathematicians only communicate knowledge through numbers, especially in pure mathematics. However, in applied mathematics images and diagrams are often used. Remember, some branches of applied mathematics are cross-disciplinary and enter the realm of human sciences, like mathematical finance, probability, risk, and statistics.

Discussing visual representations in other areas of knowledge; history, the arts, and the natural sciences. (Focus your discussion only on the human sciences and mathematics.)

Over explaining the method of communication of knowledge instead of its usefulness.

Introduce your discussion by explaining/defining visual representation, focused on the demanded areas of knowledge. Find one RLE for each AOK (and two if you have time and interest for each) and explore the helpfulness of visual representations in the communication of knowledge. It is better for one of your RLEs to “prove” the helpfulness of these representations and the other to show that they are a necessity. If you intend to find four real-life examples (two for each AOK), you can use a combination of examples with or without visual representations to guide your discussion toward one area of knowledge. Conclude based on your chosen real-life examples, that visual representations are “always” helpful in one AOK and not “always” necessary in the other. Or it is “always” helpful in both areas of knowledge. This is your essay, after all, and you can decide on the degree of the helpfulness of these representations in the communication of knowledge in the AOKs of the human sciences and mathematics.

May 2023 Title #6

To what extent is the knowledge we produce determined by the methodologies we use?

Discuss with reference to history and one other area of knowledge.

Many would immediately jump into the comparison between “methodology” and “method.” Don’t do that!

One of the four elements of the TOK knowledge framework is “methods and tools.” The IB guide describes this element, “This element focuses on exploring the methods, tools and practices that we use to produce knowledge… as well as the methodologies employed by formal disciplines.” As you can see, methods and methodologies are covered by this element of the knowledge framework. It means that although there are differences between the method and the methodology that you should be aware of, and you must explore the methodologies of your real-life examples, not the methods, there is no need to explain the differences in your essay.

One of the areas of knowledge is already determined; history. A historian may interview a source as a “method” of gathering evidence. Whether the historian should interview or not is a “methodology.” Basically, in any area of knowledge, there are many methods and tools for research. Should the expert use these methods or not, or which combination of methods is better, is the methodology the expert uses to produce knowledge. Again, you do not need to explain this difference. You should only know the difference not to make a mistake and to focus your discussion on exploring the methodology used in any real-life example.

For this prescribed title, you can choose any of the other four AOKs alongside history. This is an advantage that students can choose (at least one AOK) based on their interests. Therefore, choose the area of knowledge you know well and have mastered discussing.

You intend to write your TOK essay. Which prescribed title should you choose? You can ask your TOK teacher to assign a title to you. You can brainstorm with your classmate to choose the easiest title. You can read the explanations and suggestions on the TOK website and forums. You can analyze each title yourself. Or you can choose a title randomly. These are different methods. Which methods you choose is your methodology. This is an oversimplified example for you to understand the difference between a method and methodology.

In the human sciences, surveys, interviews, analyzing past papers, observations (and many more) are research methods. Applied research, problem-oriented research, problem-solving research, qualitative research, etc., are the methodologies human scientists use. Each of these methodologies includes a combination of methods to reach the best results.

In the natural sciences, the scientific method is “the methodology;” however, scientists devise their methodologies mostly in the experiment stage of the scientific method. A scientist chooses how to perform an experiment. For example, in biology, experimental biology is opposed to theoretical biology; manipulate and observe the experiment or use mathematical modeling. There are several other methodologies that scientists use in natural sciences that you learn in your subject courses, or you can find out about them with some research.

In the arts, examining the techniques and tools that the artist use in comparison with the movement that they follow is an example of choosing different methodologies in knowledge production in arts.

In mathematics, mathematicians may choose different approaches to solve a problem; verbally, graphically, by example, etc.

Defining and comparing methods and methodologies.

Over explaining the methodology used in knowledge production. (Mention the methodology and explore “how” the usage of that methodology helped the expert produce knowledge.)

Focusing on the methods and tools, instead of the methodology.

Exploring cross-discipline studies between two (or more) areas of knowledge.

Introduce your approach to writing your TOK essay and bring a personal example (of your methodology) in studying chemistry, biology, history, etc. Choose the second AOK. Find one RLE for each AOK (and two for each if you have time and interest). Mention the methodology that the expert used in producing knowledge in that example. Explore and explain how they reached the results based on their chosen methodology. Analyze the pros and cons of using that methodology. (If possible) Anticipate what would have happened if they had chosen a different methodology. Conclude your essay by comparing different methodologies in your examples, and express “to what extent” methodologies affect the knowledge that is produced. In some areas of knowledge, methodologies do not make a big difference in the produced knowledge, and in some AOKs different methodologies result in different (or contrasting) results.

Be the first to receive Titles Explanations and Tips by subscribing to our newsletter below and read full explanations and study examples and sample texts in the Ultimate Guide .

Let’s Unpack the November 2023 TOK Essay Titles Together!

As someone who’s been through the IB program and written more TOK essays than I can count, I’m super excited to dive into the TOK essay titles for November 2023 with you. 

I’m hoping my insights will give you a fresh perspective and help you craft theory of knowledge essays that really stand out. So, are you ready? Let’s get started!

List of IB TOK Essay Prompts November 2023

November prompt 1  – are facts alone enough to prove a claim discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge..

This question invites us to explore the nature of facts and their role in validating claims. Consider the AOKs of Natural Sciences and Human Sciences. In Natural Sciences, facts are often seen as objective and reliable, but they are also subject to interpretation and can change as new evidence emerges. In Human Sciences, facts can be influenced by personal and cultural perspectives. For WOKs, consider Reason and Language. How do we use reason to interpret facts? How does language influence our understanding of facts? For a real-life situation (RLS), you could discuss a scientific theory that was once accepted as fact but has since been disproven.

November Prompt 2  – If “the mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s and the poet’s, must be beautiful” (G.H. Hardy), how might this impact the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.

This prompt is about the intersection of aesthetics and knowledge. Consider the AOKs of Mathematics and The Arts. How does the concept of beauty apply in these areas? For WOKs, consider Intuition and Emotion. How do these ways of knowing contribute to our perception of beauty? For an RLS, you could discuss how the beauty of the Fibonacci sequence has inspired research in various fields.

November Prompt 3  – In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.

This question is about the role of authority in knowledge acquisition. Consider the AOKs of Human Sciences and History. How does the authority of experts influence our understanding in these areas? For WOKs, consider Memory and Faith. How do we rely on these ways of knowing when dealing with experts? For an RLS, you could discuss a historical event where the unquestioning acceptance of an expert’s opinion led to negative consequences..

November Prompt 4  – Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge .

This question is about the influence of values on knowledge. Consider the AOKs of History and Human Sciences. How do the values of historians or social scientists shape the knowledge they produce? For WOKs, consider Reason and Emotion. How do these ways of knowing interact with our values? For an RLS, you could discuss a historical narrative that has been influenced by the historian’s values.

November Prompt 5  – Is it always the case that “the world isn’t just the way it is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it”? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.

This prompt is about the role of interpretation in knowledge acquisition. Consider the AOKs of History and Natural Sciences. How does our interpretation shape our understanding in these areas? For WOKs, consider Imagination and Perception. How do these ways of knowing contribute to our interpretation? For an RLS, you could discuss a historical event and how different interpretations can lead to different understandings.

November Prompt 6  – Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

This question is about the process of selecting information. Consider the AOKs of Natural Sciences and Human Sciences. How do we select significant information in these areas? For WOKs, consider Reason and Memory. How do these ways of knowing guide our selection process? For an RLS, you could discuss the process of conducting a literature review for a research project.

Remember, these are just suggestions to get you started. Feel free to explore other AOKs, WOKs, and RLSs that resonate with you. And if you need any help along the way, don’t hesitate to reach out to us at IB Writing Service . We’re here to support you in your TOK essay writing process.

Select Nov 2023 TOK Title Wisely

So, there you have it, folks! The November 2023 TOK essay prompts are a goldmine of ideas waiting to be explored. As you dive into these prompts, remember to think critically, question assumptions, and bring your unique perspective to the table.

WE CAN HELP YOU WRITE A TOK ESSAY ON ANY TOPIC

Calculate the Quote for Custom IB TOK Essay

Now, I know that writing a TOK essay can be a bit daunting, especially when you’re juggling other IB assignments. But guess what? You’re not alone in this.

We at IB Writing Service are here to help. We’re not just experts in writing IB IA and Extended Essays ; we also specialize in helping IB students with other assignments, including TOK essays. 

So, if you need a helping hand, don’t hesitate to reach out to us and buy a TOK essay online from IB experts. We’re here to make your IB writing process a little less stressful and a lot more successful. Let’s do this together!

Nora Spinster

Nora Spinster is a multi-talented individual who is an educator, lawyer, youth, expert IB tutor, education activist, and language and writing enthusiast. Nora has a wealth of experience in copywriting, having worked with various organizations and businesses to craft compelling and effective copy. Nora has published articles on young learners and teenage students in the International House Journal and occasionally posts on ibwritingservice.com educational blog

• Nora Spinster https://ibwritingservice.com/blog/author/noraspinster/ How to Create a Research Question for Your IB Extended Essay?
• Nora Spinster https://ibwritingservice.com/blog/author/noraspinster/ Using Extended Essay Topics That Are Already on the Internet. Is It Good?
• Nora Spinster https://ibwritingservice.com/blog/author/noraspinster/ Can Extended Essays with a Generic Topic Score Well or Do They Have to Be Quite Original?
• Nora Spinster https://ibwritingservice.com/blog/author/noraspinster/ Philosophy Extended Essay Topics for IB

Get hot offers and discounts for your IB Assignments

Our writing solutions cater to all disciplines within the IB program, and we specialize in crafting academic papers for students of all levels. We follow the IB criteria.

Adhering strictly to the rigorous standards set by the IB, we deploy a methodical approach to our writing process. This ensures that every piece of content we generate not only meets but exceeds the expectations set within the program.

Contact us:

[email protected]

[email protected]

Latest Articles:

How to Create a Research Question for Your IB Extended Essay?

Using Extended Essay Topics That Are Already on the Internet. Is It Good?

Can Extended Essays with a Generic Topic Score Well or Do They Have to Be Quite Original?

Our services:.

• Buy Internal Assessment
• Buy Math IA
• Buy Extended Essay
• Buy TOK Essay
• Buy TOK Exhibition

IBWritingService.com is an independent academic writing aid with no official ties to the International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO). Our use of “IB” in the domain and title is purely for identification, and we neither claim nor imply any endorsement or partnership with the IBO. Our services aim to support students’ educational needs without violating IBO policies. Trademarks mentioned are property of their owners and do not suggest affiliations. By using our services, you acknowledge our non-affiliation with the IBO and that we’re not a substitute for IBO requirements. We deny any liability for use of our services in relation to the IBO.

ALL PAPERS WRITTEN BY OUR EXPERTS AS PART OF THIS WRITING SERVICE ARE FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY. WHEN USING CONTENT PURCHASED FROM THIS WEBSITE, IT MUST BE PROPERLY REFERENCED.

• Terms & Conditions
• Revision Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Refund Policy
• Cookie Policy

© 2023. All Rights Reserved.

How To Write A ToK Essay - Updated 2023

Ace your ToK Essay with our expert tips & tricks! Get the latest and greatest techniques on "How To Write A ToK Essay" and impress the IB examiners.📝💡

Table of content

Purpose of tok, assessment of tok, the game plan, execution of the gameplan, planning for tok essay, structure of tok essay, introduction, conclusions, bibliography.

How to write a TOK Essay? 

To answer that, you must familiarise yourself with what a TOK Essay is about.

Before you start reading this article,  Amanda  has some excellent TOK tips for you!

Theory of Knowledge is one of the most meta subjects that IB offers. Despite its complexity, TOK helps in providing a base for holistic learning and allows students to have a multidisciplinary experience. 

To understand TOK is to understand the essence of IB, a task that most people consider unattainable.

But not for you! 

Thank your lucky stars who made you land on Nail IB. How exactly will Nail IB help you? 

Well, nailing International Baccalaureate is something we will discuss later. 

Let's focus on cracking your TOK essay, shall we?

TOK demonstrates how students  can apply their knowledge  with  greater awareness  and  credibility .

Big words, huh? 

Now that we know that we cannot just slide through the Theory of Knowledge, let's understand how we can conquer this battle all guns blazing.

ToK essay’s primary objective is to answer the  why  behind our studies. 

It makes one aware of the real-life implications of their subjects. The students gain greater awareness of their personal and ideological assumptions and appreciate the diversity of different perspectives. It helps the students find their unique perception, a prerequisite for excelling in the IB TOK essays.

Before we dive into our gameplan, let’s overview the rules of the game.

There are two assessment tasks in the TOK: an essay and a presentation . While a presentation encourages students to explore a real-life situation through the lens of TOK, an essay is written on the basis of the various questions provided by the International Baccalaureate Organisation.

• The presentation is to assess a student’s ability to apply TOK thinking to a real-life situation whereas IB TOK essay is more conceptual.
• The essay is externally assessed by IB and must be on any one of the prescribed TOK essay titles issued by the IB for each examination session.
• Word limit of a TOK essay is 1600 words ( excludes extended notes, footnotes, bibliography).

Now that we have unleashed the game, let’s move ahead towards the gameplan of acing both, your presentation and your essay.

One of the fundamental tasks of TOK is to examine different areas of knowledge and find out their similarities and differences.

The TOK essay requires the students to investigate two Areas of Knowledge (AOK)  and two Ways of Knowing   (WOK) . AOKs and WOKs are investigated via questions such as:

• How do we know what we know? (WOK)
• What counts as evidence for X? (AOK)
• How do we judge which is the best model of Y? (WOK)
• What does theory Z mean in the real world? (AOK + WOK)

The aforementioned are  Knowledge Questions  which help combine the Areas of Knowledge and the Ways of Knowing that they are using. This eliminates the superficial way of learning and makes an individual sensitive to the nature of the information.   Our acquisition of Knowledge can be broadly divided into Shared Knowledge and Personal Knowledge.

Shared knowledge: What WE know It is the product of more than one individual. Although individuals contribute to it, shared knowledge does not solely depend upon the contributions of a particular individual—there are possibilities for others to check and amend individual contributions and add to the body of knowledge that already exists.

Personal knowledge: What I know It is essentially dependent on the experiences of a particular individual. Also known as procedural knowledge, it is gained through experience, practice and personal involvement and is intimately bound up with the particular local circumstances of the individual such as biography, interests, values, and so on.

The best hack to ace TOK essay is to develop a habit of making connections between the construction of knowledge, its acquisition and its relevance in the real world. 

After that one needs to develop an interest in understanding the difference between diversity and cultural perspectives and personal assumptions.

One also needs to critically reflect on their own beliefs and assumptions, leading to more thoughtful, responsible and purposeful lives.

Yes, this is what you signed up for. It may sound a little intimidating but once you get the hang of it you will be able to see the matrix and understand this beautiful world a little better.

Understand that to provide the best version of your writing, it will take you more than one or two drafts. First and foremost, you need to pick your essay topic diligently. Try to choose an essay topic that best interests you. The topic should also allow you to explore the Areas of Knowledge towards which you are naturally inclined. Here are a few sample questions:

a) 'Ways of knowing are a check on our instinctive judgments.' To what extend do you agree with this statement?

b) With reference to two areas of knowledge discuss the way in which shared knowledge can shape their personal knowledge.

c) How can we know if knowledge is produced more through 'Passive Observation' or 'Active-Experiment' within the Human and Natural-sciences under a Mathematical-Perspective?

d) "The whole point of knowledge is to produce both meaning and purpose in our personal lives". Assess the validity of this statement.

Great things take time. It took me more than a couple of weeks to finalize this TOK essay guide. It is completely okay if the first few drafts may not look pleasing or award-winning to you. You will require sharpening your perspective towards the topic each time you polish your draft. Your writing journey from a dull draft to a masterpiece will be a whole process that you will have to be patient with. Have faith in yourself and proceed stepwise.

You need to consider the opinions of others who have devoted hours of research and a lifetime of dedicated studying the topic that surrounds your writing. Unravelling the realms of your mind palace is so Sherlock but let’s not deny the fact that at times, Watson is the one whose expertise helps Sherlock through pretty difficult times. I mean even Batman needs a Robin. In support of my awesome sauce examples, the point I am trying to make is that  finding support for our claims and counterclaims through research is a good thing .

Use real-life examples to support your claims and counterclaims. These examples need to be documented researched examples like studies, experiments, articles, presentations by well-known people, etc. Examples that stem from your diploma subjects are highly encouraged, but those will need to be supported by research as well.   

It is suggested that you choose a title, stick to it, tackle it and not be afraid. Do not change your mind unless there is a good reason. Also, try choosing Areas of knowledge that you truly enjoy. You know slaying a known devil is much easier than an unknown one. Allot a TIMELINE to your essay. Start with creating an outline of your essay. This will help you to track your progress and accomplish your goals

You can use tools like  Trello  to organize your ideas and plan your TOK essay.

Areas of Knowledge (AOKs): TOK distinguishes between eight areas of knowledge. They are mathematics, the natural sciences, the human sciences, the arts, history, ethics, religious knowledge systems, and indigenous knowledge systems. It is suggested that students study and explore six of these eight.

Ways of knowing (WOKs): TOK identifies eight specific WOKs- language, sense perception, emotion, reason, imagination, faith, intuition, and memory. It is suggested that studying four of these eight in-depth would be appropriate. WOKs underlie the methodology of the areas of knowledge and provide a basis for personal knowledge.

Moving ahead, let us discuss the structure of your TOK essay.

Your essay will consist of 4 broad segregations

Before breaking down further on the pillars, keep the following in mind

• Please note what the TOK essay title is asking you. (Read it a couple of times. We highly recommend that you brainstorm ideas with your TOK coordinator)
• Make sure you understand the command term and the question it is asking.
• What kind of knowledge is being elicited?
• When choosing your areas of knowledge (AoK) and ways of knowing (WoK) make sure that you are able to draw contrasts and comparisons, that is, you are able to find evidence that supports as well as challenges your claims.
• Identify key terms in your TOK essay title. Make sure you define them. Your essay will gravitate around them. Key terms/words in your titles are your essay anchors. Your response should be built around them.
• Your writing skills come in handy while you work on your IB TOK essay. Like any other essay make sure you have proper thesis statements and topic sentences to guide the evaluator through your work.
• Respect the TOK essay title. Rephrasing the topic is not encouraged . Your main job is to address the title.

Introduce your topic accurately and state your thesis statement for the essay carefully.  A thesis statement is like a teaser to your entire essay wherein you define your key terms and introduce your interpretation of the question. Make sure that you do not reword the prescribed title in your thesis. Instead, it needs to, as the word says, INTRODUCE your readers to what your essay is about. A strong introduction allows the reader to deduce what knowledge question(s) you are trying to answer.

So, in a nutshell

• Write interesting things about the given TOK essay title .
• Define key terms
• Narrow in on the particularly interesting aspect
• State your thesis statement . This will be your short answer to your given title if you don't know how to write a killer thesis statement check out this blog from SparkNotes .
• State your Roadmap. This will help the readers in understanding the direction of your essay.

The body can be mainly divided into 3 segments.

Body (1st Segment)

• AoK Claim:  Here you investigate your first Area of Knowledge and draw parallels between your AoK and the question. This is done by stating your claim. Claims can be general in nature and need not reference a particular area of knowledge. They help you shape your essay and investigate the question further. 
• Evidence: Example of a real-life situation, describe thoroughly and accurately, which supports your stated claim. (AoK)
• Counter-Claim: State your counter-claim: like claims, those can be general and need not reference a particular area of knowledge. Counterclaim helps you show the other side the coin and gives your essay a holistic nature. 
• Evidence: A referenced real-life situation/example. Describe thoroughly and accurately, show how this supports your counterclaim (AoK ).
• Don’t forget to weave in your WoKs:  You need to take into account the source of your knowledge. Here you can also investigate if your nature of acquiring the knowledge has, in any way, affected it. It is good practice to question if your knowledge would be different had it been acquired through a different source/method
• Mini-conclusion: Here you analyze your examples in reference to your claims and counterclaims. You must connect to your thesis statement and the prescribed title. How does your proposed argument, in this particular part of the body, connect to the prescribed title and the knowledge questions you are trying to answer?

Body (2): Follow the above process for your second AOK.

• Use this part of your essay to compare and contrast your varying AoKs. You need to connect them to your thesis and your prescribed title clearly showing how your arguments respond to the PT.

Your conclusion section will make your essay come together. It is the glue that will make your essay stick together. Herein, you need to

• Reiterate your thesis (initial response).
• Use your mini conclusions to write a final conclusion.
• Tell the reader what the significance is for knowing what we know in this particular PT.
• Discuss implications as well.
• Offer another perspective, how will the perspective of a different person affect the claims/counterclaims you make in the essay?
• Don’t forget to make the end strong.

We recommend all the ib students use the  citation machine  (It's FREE) to organize or generate a bibliography for your TOK essay. Please go through this extensive guide provided by the IB before you start working on your citations.

If you are still struggling heaps with your TOK essay feel free to subscribe to our tok notes bundles or get access to more than 500+ IBDP notes and past papers here .

Nail IB is your virtual companion that helps you hustle through your diploma and provide you with the right resources at the right time. To know more about acing IB, click  here .

I hope this article will become the foundation for figuring out how to write a TOK Essay.

Remember to have faith in yourself.

I hope you NAIL your TOK essay!

Quoting the great Napolean Hill

"Whatever the mind of a man can conceive and believe, it can achieve."

IB Resources you will love!

Nan + free ib flashcards, -1 + free ia samples, nan + ib videos by experts, -1 + ib sample practice questions, ib resources for nan + subjects.

Theory of Knowledge: An Alternative Approach

Why is an alternative approach necessary?

The November 2023 TOK Essay Prescribed Titles

A few notes of warning and guidance before we begin:

The TOK essay provides  you  with an opportunity to become engaged in thinking and reflection. What are outlined below are strategies and suggestions, questions and possible responses only for deconstructing the TOK titles as they have been given. They should be used alongside the discussions that you will carry out with your peers and teachers during the process of constructing your essay.

The notes here are intended to guide you towards a thoughtful, personal response to the prescribed titles posed.  They are not to be considered as  the  answer and they should only be used to help provide you with another perspective to the ones given to you in the titles and from your own TOK class discussions. You need to remember that most of your examiners have been educated in the logical positivist schools of Anglo-America and this education pre-determines their predilection to view the world as they do and to understand the concepts as they do. The TOK course itself is a product of this logical positivism as are the responses given by artificial intelligence programs such as ChatGPT.

There is no substitute for your own personal thought and reflection, as well as your own experience of being in a TOK course, and these notes are not intended as a cut and paste substitute to the hard work that thinking requires. Some of the comments on one title may be useful to you in the approach you are taking in the title that you have personally chosen, so it may be useful to read all the comments and give them some reflection.

My experience has been that candidates whose examples match those to be found on TOK “help” sites (and this is  another  of those TOK help sites) struggle to demonstrate a mastery of the knowledge claims and knowledge questions contained in the examples.  The best essays carry a trace of a struggle that is the journey on the path to thinking. Many examiners state that in the very best essays they read, they can visualize the individual who has thought through them sitting opposite to them. To reflect the struggle of this journey in your essay is your goal.

Remember to include sufficient TOK content in your essay. When you have completed your essay, ask yourself if it could have been written by someone who had not participated in the TOK course (or by the Chat GPT bot). If the answer to that question is “yes”, then you do not have sufficient TOK content in your essay. It is this TOK content that will distinguish your essay from an AI response. Personal and shared knowledge, the knowledge framework, the ways of knowing and the areas of knowledge are terms that will be useful to you in your discussions.

Here is a link to a PowerPoint that contains recommendations and a flow chart outlining the steps to writing a TOK essay. Some of you may need to get your network administrator to make a few tweaks in order for you to access it. Comments, observations and discussions are most welcome. Contact me at  [email protected]  or directly through this website.

https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B-8nWwYRUyV6bDdXZ01POFFqVlU

A  sine qua non : the opinions expressed here are entirely my own and do not represent any organization or collective of any kind. Now, down to business.

Prescribed Essay Titles

1. Are facts alone enough to prove a claim? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

In deconstructing the key terms of this title, we find that we will need to discuss the ‘ facts alone ‘, ‘ enough ‘, ‘ prove ‘, and ‘ claim ‘. We will also have to address the word ‘ are ‘ i.e., the ‘being’ of ‘facts’; for how this ‘being’ is understood and interpreted is the context in which and from which what are called ‘facts’ are derived and upheld, and are the basis in which and from which they will derive their meaning or meaningfulness.

‘Facts’ are considered to be ‘objective’ pieces of information that can be observed, measured, and/or verified. Observation is primarily based on sight and hearing, though the other senses can be involved. The recent discoveries of the James Webb telescope, for instance, are based on observations made of the far reaches of space. They are, and will, revolutionize the theory and thinking in astrophysics; they are an extension of the human eye.

That which is called a ‘fact’ is based on empirical evidence (observation), logical deductions (through the principle of reason), or established truths (axioms and laws that pre-determine how something will be viewed and understood). Facts possess a certain degree of reliability or surety and can be ‘counted on’ to reveal some truths regarding things. These truths are widely accepted within a given framework or area of knowledge, and all that is can be placed (and is placed) one way or another into an area of knowledge. However, facts by themselves do not always guarantee the complete understanding or proof of a claim. They may illuminate the things or situations dimly. The Big Bang Theory of the origin of the universe is being placed into question by the discoveries of the James Webb Telescope, for instance. Evidence and explanations that the theory once provided will now have to be revised. Revisions of the concepts of time and space will need to be provided. Despite this, facts do provide a foundation (but it is only one possible foundation…there could be others); but how they are interpreted and contextualized are crucial in determining their significance and importance.

A knowledge ‘claim ‘ is a statement or assertion, the proffering of a judgement. Statements may be made through words or speech or they can be made through numbers. “1 + 1 = 2” is a statement or assertion in which “=” is the judgement. “2” is not the judgement but the outcome which results from the judgement. It is either correct or incorrect. The judgement “=” derives from how a “1” is viewed, interpreted and understood. The viewing and understanding will determine how judgements are to be made within the context of the field that we call the ‘theory of numbers’. “Theory” comes to us from the Greek word theoria which means ‘to view’, and it was particularly related to the theatre, the ‘viewing place’. The viewing and the understanding (interpretation) are prior to the judgements or knowledge claims that are made or can be made within the context from which they are derived. The philosopher Kant once said: “Judgement is the seat of truth”. It is the judgement which determines whether the things or situations about which they are made will be illuminated or not.

We doubt a claim when we are lacking certainty and reliability regarding those who are making the claim, the sources of the claim, or when the things about which the claim is being made are not sufficiently justified; that is, sufficient reasons have not been supplied for the claim. We cannot “count on” them because they are not “grounded” and the principle of sufficient reason supplies the grounds. When we speak of “grounds”, we are speaking about whether the “evidence” or the “explanation” regarding the thing which is being spoken about is “adequate” or justified. This evidence or explanation will find its “grounds” in  the principle of sufficient reason.  Reasons must be given for the claims being made; that is, we doubt the ‘facts’ of the claim and if sufficient reasons are not given, we doubt the  truth  of the claim being made. The reasons provide both the evidence and the explanation, the ‘proof’ that the ‘facts’ are indeed facts. But as Aristotle once said: “For as the eyes of bats are to the blaze of day, so is the reason in our soul to the things which are by nature most evident of all.”

On a shop which sells Antique Hand Bags near here is a sign which reads: “The Shop is not Open because it is Closed”. Such a sign speaks the truth in that the fact is that the shop is closed. However, it does not supply a  sufficient reason  for the shop’s being closed. The sign is what is referred to as a tautology. No reason is given for the shop’s being closed i.e., is it after hours?, the owner is away on holidays?, the owner is observing a religious festival?, etc. Tautologies are prominent in modern day computer language. We “skip over” knowing the reasons for the things being as they are because we, in fact, believe we already  know  them for being what they are and as they are. (This is evident in ‘artificial intelligence’ and presents one of its gravest dangers.)

The Greeks began their journey to thought by first “trusting” in that which they were seeking, but they also “doubted”. Doubt was a requisite for thought for it inspired “wonder”. Both doubt and skepticism were requirements for beginning thinking. But the end for the Greeks was to demonstrate why their trust was an appropriate response to the things that are and this trust overcame the doubt and skepticism that initiated their search for knowledge. Our doubt and skepticism, on the other hand, is spurred by the requirement of things and situations giving sufficient reasons for that thing’s or situation’s being what and how it is; and should these not be given, then the thing is not . It becomes something “subjective”. Something subjective does not have being for sufficient reasons cannot be supplied for its being.

We distinguish ‘facts’ from ‘values’ in the Human Sciences and the sciences in general. Science is the theory of the real. This is captured in a quote attributed to Einstein: “Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world.” ‘Values’ are seen as ‘subjective’ while ‘facts’ are seen as ‘objective’. ‘Facts’ derive from ‘the world’ and the viewing of that world as ‘object’, while ‘values’ derive from personal choices that individuals make regarding the objects present within that world. ‘Facts’ are considered the stuff of thought, while ‘values’ are seen as the stuff of emotion and action. From Einstein’s quote, we can see that there are ‘values’ already embedded in any scientific viewing of the world. The statements or assertions of science already contain within themselves the ‘values’ that will determine whether those statements will be correct or incorrect.

The choice of the pursuit of science is the human response to a certain mode or way in which truth discloses or reveals itself. Science arises as a response to a claim laid upon human beings in the way that the things of nature appear i.e., the ‘facts’. It is Being that makes this claim (but, then, what  is  Being, the ‘are’ of our prescribed title?). The sciences set up certain domains or contexts and then pursue the revealing that is consistent within those domains or contexts. The domain, for example, of chemistry is an abstraction . It is the domain of chemical formulas. To attempt to dwell within the viewing of this domain alone would be akin to madness. Nature is seen as a realm of formulae. Scientists pose this realm by way of a reduction; it is an artificial realm that arises from a very artificial attitude towards things. The ‘fact’ of water has to be posed as H 2 O. Once it is so posed, once things are reduced to chemical formulae, then the domain of chemistry can be exploited for practical ends. We can make fire out of water once water is seen as a compound of hydrogen and oxygen. In the illustration shown here, we have the chemical formula for the physical composition of Van Gogh’s yellow paint in his “Sunflowers”. While interesting in its being a ‘fact’, it tells us absolutely nothing of the painting itself.

What are the implications of this? The things investigated by chemistry are not “objects” in the sense that they have an autonomous standing on their own i.e. they are not “the thrown against”, the  jacio , as is understood traditionally. For science, the chemist in our example, nature is composed of formulae, and a formula is not a self-standing object.  It is an abstraction, a product of the mind. (Einstein’s quote again.) A formula is  posed ; it is an abstraction. A formula is  posed ; it is an ob-ject, that is, it does not view nature as composed of objects that are autonomous, self-standing things, but nature as formulae. The viewing of nature as formulae turns the things viewed into posed ob-jects; and in this posing turns the things of nature, ultimately, into dis-posables. The viewing of water as H 2 O is an example of a Rubicon that has been crossed. There is no turning back once this truth has been revealed. That water can be turned into fire has caused restrictions in our bringing liquids onto airplanes, for instance, for they have the capability of destroying those aircraft, but water viewed in such a way cannot be used for baptisms, for instance.

To see Van Gogh’s “Sunflowers” as a ‘painted thing’, an object, is to cease to consider it as a “painting” or work of art that says something more than the mere object itself could possibly say. The “facts” of the painting do not get us closer to what, in fact , the painting is. When art is viewed as an “object”, it ceases to be art; nevertheless, this approach to art as “aesthetics”, or a calculable mode of viewing what is present to the senses, is the prevailing mode of viewing art.

The limitations of facts can be seen in a recent USA Supreme Court decision to strike down Affirmative Action Programs for both corporations and institutions of higher learning citing them as ‘unconstitutional’. The Court viewed affirmative action programs as ‘reverse discrimination’, and that positions on corporate boards or admissions to universities should be based on ‘merit’, since the USA was now (the Court viewed) sufficiently ‘color-blind’ to warrant such a decision in keeping with the ideals presented in the US Constitution. While the Court’s view is a ‘consummation devoutly to be wished’, it ignores ‘the facts’ of the systemic historical racism and oppression of certain ethnic and racial groups that has occurred throughout America’s history. If facts are considered to be objective truths which can be “observed, measured, and verified”, then the Supreme Court’s decision is one that completely ignores ‘the facts’.

The reality of American history can be seen as analogous to the locking of the gates separating 3rd class passengers from 1st class passengers on board the Titanic both before and while the ship was sinking. That most of the survivors were 1st class passengers and most of the dead 3rd class passengers was the inevitable result. The 3rd class passengers did not have access to the too few lifeboats that were available. The building of the USA Interstate Highway system in the 1950s, for example, did not have and still does not have off-ramps to African-American communities in many cases. Examples (evidence) abound of the historical racism that is prevalent in the USA of today. The reality of the USA is that its institutions and infrastructures were, and are, inherently and implicitly racist as was its Constitution. No amount of ‘colorblindness’ will overcome these concrete facts and make them non-racist. Some of the passengers on the Titanic went to their deaths retaining the view that the ship was ‘unsinkable’; the Supreme Court of the USA refuses to recognize and acknowledge (or perhaps it does and would prefer to see the USA as an autocracy) the fact that America has become a ‘failed state’ in its experiment with democracy and that its ship of state is rapidly sinking.

The American Supreme Court example illustrates that interpretation plays a significant role in understanding facts. In our being with others, our politics, our living in communities, different individuals may draw various conclusions or interpretations from the same set of facts that are influenced by their perspectives, biases, and prior knowledge. There are no ‘alternative facts’; there are only alternative interpretations of the facts that are present. Socrates once noted that the opposite of knowledge is not ignorance but madness. In our politics, what is called ‘public opinion’ is shaped by the sources of information that derive from mass media. In considering whether facts are a sufficient foundation for a knowledge claim or assertion, it is crucial to consider the source, methodology, and potential biases when evaluating the validity of the claim based on the presented or selected facts.

Because our understanding of facts is limited in its scope to viewing the world as “object”, their ability to provide a comprehensive understanding of complex contexts and issues is also limited. They often provide only partial information, neglecting the broader context such as was the case in the recent American Supreme Court decision on affirmative action. Facts may answer the “what” and “how” questions, but they often fall short in addressing the “why” and “what then” aspects of a claim. In areas of knowledge like history and the social sciences, facts alone are insufficient to explain phenomena or validate claims, and this is primarily due to the fact that it is human beings who are the creators of these areas of knowledge and are the subject matter of these areas of study. Interpretation, contextualization, and critical analysis are necessary to fill the gaps and establish a coherent understanding in these two areas of knowledge and it is here that errors can occur.

Facts are often misused or misrepresented to support false or misleading claims, particularly in political contexts where power and its maintenance is usually involved and is ultimately the goal. Fraudulent knowledge claims often occur where truth is not what is desired but the power and recognition of social prestige is in operation. Logical fallacies, such as cherry-picking evidence or drawing hasty generalizations (e.g. Fox News’ coverage of the January 6 Capitol riots), can undermine the credibility of an argument, even if it is based on factual information. Therefore, the ability to reason and critically analyze the available facts is crucial to avoid misinformation and reach valid conclusions. (It should be noted that “information” is understood here as “that which is responsible for the form so that that which is generated or produced, perceived and understood can inform” i.e., in-form-ation).

2. If “the mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s and the poet’s, must be beautiful” (G.H. Hardy), how might this impact the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.

This is a very challenging title for it asks you to consider what the beautiful is and how the “ patterns ” of mathematics are similar in their beauty to those patterns used by a poet or a painter . The subsequent question is “how this might impact the production of knowledge” . The difficulty arises from the fact that the dominant form and understanding of mathematics today is algebraic calculation which finds its origins in the German philosopher Leibniz’s finite calculus. This calculus is related to our viewing of the world as “object”.

We often hear that ‘beauty is in the eye of the beholder’, but this begs the question “What then is beholding”? When such an assertion is made, the assumption being made is that beauty is ‘subjective’ and that its recognition and appreciation is in the ‘holding’ or ‘grasping’ of that which is brought forth to presence, to “being” (“be-“) by the ‘subjective’ ego cogito of the French philosopher Descartes. This “bringing forth to presence” is what we mean by “pro-duction”, and this bringing forth may be natural (“produce” e.g., crops) or through human beings in their “works” (i.e., paintings, buildings, etc.) The Greek word for this bringing forth is poiesis from which our word poetry derives. The process of ‘bringing forth’ or production led to ‘perfection’ or completion, since nothing further needed to be added to or subtracted from the thing or work that was brought forth. The completed work was itself “knowledge” of the thing from which it derived its name.

Among the Greeks, the Pythagoreans are said to have discovered the “golden ratio”, which is also sometimes called the “golden section”,  the “golden mean”, or the “divine proportion” (Encyclopedia Britannica). In Greek, the word “mathematics” meant “that which can be learned and that which can be taught”, and it was a much greater and broader concept than what we understand as mathematics today, although the initial meaning still obscurely prevails in what we call technology today. The Greeks more closely aligned what we understand as mathematics with arithmos or ‘counting’ or ‘counting on’, and we have derived our word ‘arithmetic’ from this understanding.

For the Pythagoreans, human beings were considered “irrational numbers”, for they believed that this best described that ‘perfect imperfection’ that is human being, that “work” that was “perfect” in its incompleteness. The irrational number (1 + Square root of√5)/2 approximately equal to 1.618) was , for the Pythagoreans, a mathematical statement illustrating the relation of the human to the divine. It is the ratio of a line segment cut into two pieces of different lengths such that the ratio of the whole segment to that of the longer segment is equal to the ratio of the longer segment to the shorter segment. In terms of present day algebra, letting the length of the shorter segment be one unit and the length of the longer segment be  x  units gives rise to the equation ( x  + 1)/ x  =  x /1; this may be rearranged to form the quadratic equation   x 2  –  x  – 1 = 0, for which the positive solution is  x  = (1 + Square root of√5)/2), the golden ratio. It should be noted that the Greeks rejected Babylonian (Indian) algebra and algebra in general as being ‘unnatural’ due to its abstractness, and they had a much different conception of number than we have today.

The Pythagoreans and their geometry are not how we look upon mathematics and number today. The Pythagoreans were viewed as a religious cult even in their own day. For them, the practice of geometry was no different than a form of prayer or piety. The Greek philosopher Aristotle called his former teacher, the Greek philosopher Plato, a “pure Pythagorean”.

This “pure Pythagoreanism” is demonstrated in Plato’s illustration of the Divided Line which is none other than an application of the golden mean to all the things that are and how we apprehend or behold them. I am going to provide a detailed example from Plato’s Republic because I believe it is crucial to our understanding of the thinking that has occurred in the West.

At Republic, Book VI, 508B-C, Plato makes an analogy between the role of the sun, whose light gives us our vision to see and the visible things to be seen and the role of the Good in that seeing. The sun rules over our vision and the things we see. The Good rules over our knowledge and the (real) objects of our knowledge (the forms, the ideas or that which brings the visible things to appearance and, thus, to being) and also over the things that the sun gives to vision:

“This, then, you must understand that I meant by the offspring of the good that which the good begot to stand in a proportion with itself: as the good is in the intelligible region with respect to intelligence (DE) and to that which is intellected [CD], so the sun is (light) in the visible world to vision [BC] and what is seen [AB].”

If we put the mathematical statement of the golden ratio or the divine proportion into the illustration (1 + Square root of√5)/2), the 1 is the Good, or the whole of things, and the “offspring of the Good” (the “production of knowledge” of our title) is the square root of 5 which is then divided by 2 (the whole of creation plus the Good or the Divine), then we can comprehend the example of the Divided Line in a Greek rather than a Cartesian manner. Plato is attempting to resolve the problem of the One and the Many here.

The ratio or proportion of the division of the visibles (AB:BC) and the division of the intelligibles (CD:DE) are in the same ratio or proportion as the visibles to the intelligibles (AC:CE). Plato has made BC = CD, and Plato at one point identifies the contents of these two sections. He says (510B) that in CD the soul is compelled to investigate by treating as images the things imitated in the former division (BC). In (BC), the things imitated are the ‘shadows’ of the things as they really are. These are the realms of ‘trust’ and ‘belief’ ( pistis ) and of understanding or how we come to be in our world.

There is no “subject/object” separation of realms here, no abstractions or formulae created by the human mind only (the intelligence and that which is intellected), but rather the mathematical description or statement of the beauty of the world. In the Divided Line, one sees three applications of the golden ratio: The Good, the Intelligible, and the Sensible or Visual i.e., the Good in relation to the whole line, The Good in relation to the Intelligible, and the Intelligible in relation to the Visible. (It is from this that I understand the statement of the French philosopher Simone Weil: “Faith is the experience that the intelligence is illuminated by Love .” Love is the light, that which is given which illuminates the things of the intelligence and the things of the world. This illumination is what is called Truth. There is a concrete tripartite unity of Goodness, Beauty and Truth.) This tripartite yoking of the sensible to the intelligible and to the Good corresponds to what Plato says is the tripartite being of the human soul and the tripartite Being of the God who is the Good. The human being in its being is a microcosm of the Whole or the macrocosm. (See William Blake’s lines in “Auguries of Innocence”: “God appears and God is Light/ To those poor souls that dwell in night/ But does the human form display/ To those who dwell in realms of day.”)

The golden ratio occurs in many mathematical contexts today and it may give a sense of what Hardy meant in the quote that is the prompt or substance for this title. The golden ratio is geometrically constructible by straightedge and compass, and it occurs in the investigation of the Archimedean and Platonic solids. It is the limit of the ratios of consecutive terms of the Fibonacci number sequence 1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13,…, in which each term beyond the second is the sum of the previous two, and it is also the value of the most basic of continued fractions, namely 1 + 1/(1 + 1/(1 + 1/(1 +⋯. (Encyclopedia Britannica)

In modern mathematics, the golden ratio occurs in the description of fractals, figures that exhibit self-similarity and play an important role in the study of chaos  and  dynamical systems . (Encyclopedia Britannica)

One of the questions raised here is: do we have number after the experience of the physical, objective world or do we have number prior to it and have the physical world because of number? The original meaning of the Greek word mathemata is “what can be learned and what can be taught”. What can be learned and what can be taught are those things that have been brought to presence through language and measured in their form through number. Our understanding of number is what the Greeks called arithmos, “arithmetic”, that which can be counted and that which can be “counted on”. These numbers begin at 4.

The principles of the golden or divine ratio are to be seen in the statue of the Doryphoros seen here. The statue of the Doryphoros, or the Spear Bearer, is around the mid -5 th century BCE.   Its maker, Polycleitus, wrote that the purpose or end of art was to achieve to kallos , “the beautiful” and to eu (the perfect, the complete, or the good) in the work. The secret of achieving to kallos and to eu lay in the mastery of symmetria , the perfect “commensurability” of all parts of the statue to one another and to the whole. This is pure Pythagoreanism. Some scholars relate the ratios of the statue to the shapes of the letters of the Greek alphabet.  

The Egyptian connection to the geometry of the Pythagoreans is of the utmost importance to Western civilization and also to what we are discussing here. The Pythagorean theorem: a 2 +b 2 = c 2 is the formula whereby two incommensurate things are brought into proportion, relation, or harmony with one another and are thus unified and made the Same i.e., symmetria . What is the incommensurate? Human beings and all else that is not human being are incommensurate. For the Pythagoreans, human beings are irrational numbers. Pi, the circumference of a circle, is an irrational number, and the creation itself is an irrational number because it was viewed as circular or spherical. The human being is a microcosm of the whole of the creation (or what is called Nature) itself.

The meanings of the word “incommensurate” are extremely important here. It is said to be “a false belief or opinion of something or someone, the matter or residue that settles to the bottom of a liquid (the dregs), the state of being isolated, kept apart, or withdrawn into solitude.” An incommensurate is something that doesn’t fit. Pythagorean geometry was the attempt to overcome all of these “incommensurables” in human existence, an attempt to make them fit or to show that they are fitted, to yoke them together. “Fittedness” is what the Greeks understood by “justice”; and the concept of justice was tied in with “fairness” (beauty), what was due to someone or something, what was suitable or apt for a human being. From their geometry, the Pythagoreans were said to have invented music based on the relations of the various notes around a mean i.e., the length of the string and how it is divided into suitable lengths as to allow a harmonic to be heard when it was plucked. This harmony found in music by the Pythagoreans was looked for in all human relations between themselves and the things that are.

When we speak of the “production of knowledge” in the modern sense, we are speaking of technology and the finished products that technology brings forth. “Knowledge’ is the finished or completed ‘work’ that is the result of the “production” that technology ‘brings forth’. Technology comes from two Greek words: Techne , which means ‘knowing’ or ‘knowing one’s way about or in something’ in such a way that one can ‘produce’ knowledge and begin to make something; and logos which is that which makes this knowledge at all possible. We confuse the things or works of technology, the produce of technology, with technology itself. This is not surprising given the origin of the word itself. The word is not to be found in Greek.

Since technology rests upon an understanding of the world as object, an understanding of the world as posable , its mathematics are focused on, for the most part, algebraic calculation which turns its objects into disposables. Whatever beauty an object might have is skipped over (since beauty is not calculable as much as we may try to do so) in order to demand that the object give its reasons for being as it is. The end of technology is power and will to power, and this is why artificial intelligence is the flowering of technology at its height of its realization. It is a great closing down of thinking for it is, ultimately, an anti-logos . There is no question that there is some beauty involved in technology, but it is a beauty that is more akin to a tsunami or a volcanic eruption. It is a terrible beauty and it may lead to our extinction as a species.

3. In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Title #3 will, undoubtedly, be one of the more popular choices among students this November. Its key terms and phrases are “ acquisition of knowledge “, “ following experts unquestioningly “, “ dangerous “, and “ ignoring them completely “. In fact, titles #1, #3, #4, #5, and #6 are all connected and related to each other in a number of crucial ways and this is one of the reasons why I would suggest that the attentive student give consideration to all the thoughts and responses to the titles given here.

“Acquisition” means to ‘get’, ‘to grasp’, to take hold of something and take possession of it. It means ‘that which is responsible for the acquiring or getting of something’. Our wonderful phrase in English, “I get it”, is an example of this grasping and taking possession of something. Usually it is our beginning understanding of something, our “shared knowledge” (historical knowledge) of something. What we grasp or take hold of from others in our discourses with them is “opinion” not knowledge, whether it be from those in our communities who are called ‘experts’ or from those who dwell in the murky communities of QAnon. (The communities are ‘murky’ because they are ‘a-nonymous’ i.e., they have ‘no name’; and, thus, they have no desire to be brought to light, to be brought out into the open. The Ring of Gyges from Republic Bk II and the Ring of Power from Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings illustrate the essence of such groups and the desires of such groups. Both rings provide invisibility (anonymity), immortality (or “the desire for long life”), and power, control or domination. The same elements are shown in the three “deathly hallows” of Harry Potter, but Rowling has mistakenly seen these powers as somehow conducive of good i.e., that Harry is capable of destroying the elder wand after the destruction of Voldemort in not something human beings are capable of without the assistance of outside help, or Chance, according to Plato and Tolkien). This acquiring of what we think is knowledge becomes part of ourselves and who we think we are; and this, in turn, will determine the actions that we will choose to take.

An ‘expert’ is one who demonstrates an ‘expertise’, a ‘know how’, someone who knows their way in, around, or about something. This kind of knowledge was called techne by the Greeks. An expert demonstrates a skill which is particular and singular. If I require an appendectomy, I would not ask my next door neighbour to perform it. I would seek out a surgeon, an expert, someone with ‘know how’. Such common sense rules in matters concerning our health. Why does it not also rule in the health of our living with others in our communities i.e., our politics? (Human Sciences) This is a question which the philosopher Plato asked, and this ‘health’ was considered with regard to our souls. Since the number of us who believe we have a ‘soul’ diminishes with technology’s ever increasing impact on our reflection, contemplation and thinking, we look to the Human Science Psychology (from the Greek psyche meaning ‘soul’ and logos understood as ‘the study of…’) which focuses on the human mind and brain (which are both considered to be the same object of research in some areas of this field). We all believe we are ‘experts’ in politics, and we can find the roots of such belief as having stemmed from the thinking of the French philosopher Rousseau.

It would obviously be ‘dangerous’ for me and to me if I tried to perform the surgery myself or looked to someone who did not have expertise in the field to perform it. We take great caution and are very circumspect when we deal with such matters. Why is such circumspection and caution not exercised in our politics?

In the political realm, the great danger coeval with living in communities is tyranny, and it behooves us to try to find experts on tyranny in order to understand the phenomenon. Such an expert was the Greek philosopher Plato. In Plato’s view, the tyrant is someone who is incapable of recognizing the ‘otherness’ of human beings and is, thus, incapable of giving other human beings ‘their due’. Plato considered them the most unhappy of human beings. The best example we have in the English literature on tyranny is Shakespeare’s Macbeth. Giving others what is ‘owed’ to them, ‘their due’, is what we understand as “justice”. Tyrants see nothing due to other human beings, and they themselves expect a ‘loyalty’ which, if it is not received, will be enforced through fear and the exercise of power. Tyranny is a great danger because when tyranny takes hold, the human beings living in that community are not able to realize their full being as human beings, their full potentialities and possibilities, because they are not rendered their ‘due’. Not being rendered one’s due is what we call oppression.

For the human beings who are subject to tyranny, the danger facing them is that, because their humanity is not recognized, they themselves will cease to be fully human beings. The curious fact is that, within the tyranny, many will be satisfied with this condition. In the analogy we have been using here, they will perform the surgery upon themselves.

The “ignoring of expertise” in the matter of politics carries grave consequences. Socrates once said: “The opposite of knowledge is not ignorance but madness”. Madness is rare in individuals but it is the rule in social collectives. The German philosopher Nietzsche once wrote: “Power makes stupid” and politics is the realm of power. Stupidity is a form of madness. Stupidity is a moral phenomenon, not an intellectual phenomenon. It has to do with actions, not thinking. In my 40 years of teaching, I never came across a ‘stupid’ student; I did come across a few stupid parents, though.

The German priest Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who was hanged by the tyrant Adolf Hitler in 1945, once wrote: “Stupidity is a more dangerous enemy of the good than evil”. He continued: “Against stupidity we are defenseless. Neither protests nor the use of force accomplish anything here; reasons fall on deaf ears; facts that contradict one’s prejudgment simply need not be believed- in such moments the stupid person even becomes critical – and when facts are irrefutable they are just pushed aside as inconsequential, as incidental. In all this the stupid person, in contrast to the malicious one, is utterly self-satisfied and, being easily irritated, becomes dangerous by going on the attack. For that reason, greater caution is called for than with a malicious one. Never again will we try to persuade the stupid person with reasons, for it is senseless and dangerous.”

The ignoring of the opinions of ‘experts’ does not grant freedom and independence. As Bonhoeffer wrote before he was hanged: “The fact that the stupid person is often stubborn must not blind us to the fact that he is not independent. In conversation with him, one virtually feels that one is dealing not at all with a person, but with slogans, catchwords and the like that have taken possession of him. He is under a spell, blinded, misused, and abused in his very being. Having thus become a mindless tool, the stupid person will also be capable of any evil and at the same time incapable of seeing that it is evil. This is where the danger of diabolical misuse lurks, for it is this that can once and for all destroy human beings.” As was stated under Title #1, the ability to reason and critically analyze the available facts provided by experts is crucial to avoid misinformation and reach valid conclusions, and this is particularly so in the political realm.

Plato identified five different political regimes which he ordered from best to worst: 1. monarchy; 2. aristocracy; 3. oligarchy; 4. democracy; and 5. tyranny. Democracy was placed next to tyranny because under democratic regimes, human beings will be ruled by their selfish passions and appetites. Such a rule would not be conducive to human beings’ achieving their best potentials and possibilities with regard to their souls, in Plato’s opinion. A legitimate monarchy was the opposite of an illegitimate tyranny. A legitimate monarch would, if he were a good king, exercise the royal techne of statesmanship. His recognition of others would render, as best as possible, to each what was their due. In the regimes ruled by aristocracies, the ‘aristocrats’ would presumably be the ‘experts’ within that society for they would be the ‘best’ that the society had to offer (which is what the word ‘aristocracy’ originally meant). History shows us many ‘aristocratic’ regimes which were not ruled by the ‘best’. With the arrival of capitalism in the post-Renaissance world, the propertied classes were seen as the best to rule and establish the regime. With the advancement of technology, these propertied classes have taken the form of the military-industrial complex and the bureaucracies related to them.

I have focused on the AOK of the Human Sciences in these notes to this title. This is because the greatest danger to life is war, and war is a matter of politics. In the Arts, we can develop our tastes and opinions based on the opinions of experts (critics) or we can ignore those opinions and formulate our own. The worst that can happen is a heated discussion with family members or with those in a bar once we are too far into our cups. Our nation will not go to war over them. The “culture wars” going on in the USA and elsewhere are over politics and power and who gets to eat what, not over truth and beauty in the Arts.

4. Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

Title #4 exhibits a number of the same concepts and characteristics as titles #1, #3, #5 and #6. Here, ‘ problematic ‘, ‘knowledge ‘, ‘ shaped ‘, ‘ values ‘, and ‘ who produce it ‘ are key concepts and terms. Of course, ‘is’ and how it is understood is problematic in itself!

What is ‘problematic’ when ‘knowledge’ is considered ‘information’? What values are present when ‘information’ is considered knowledge? As mentioned in an earlier title (#1), ‘information’ means that which is responsible for the ‘form’ so that the data or substance of a statement can ‘inform’ (in – form – ation: 1. -ation from the Greek aitia “that which is responsible for”; that which is the “cause of”; 2. -form: the “shape” or outward appearance of something, in Greek, the eidos of something; 3. in-form: that which makes possible the ‘knowledge’ in the form of a statement that is to be passed over to someone because of the ‘form’ in which it has been placed.) From the question of our title, it is the ‘values’ of those who are putting forth the statement that is responsible for the ‘form’, the ‘shape’ or the outward appearance of the thing (knowledge) that is brought forward or ‘produced’.

What, for example, may be problematic about artificial intelligence? What ‘values’ are inherent in its roots that we should be concerned about? To begin with, historically, the fact that the chief funding for artificial intelligence research in the USA was provided by the Department of Defense should make us wary. What might the values of the DOD be in that it would provide funding for AI? How do those values relate to the essence of artificial intelligence itself? What is the essence of artificial intelligence?

If the apex of technology is cybernetics and cybernetics is the unlimited mastery of human beings by other human beings, then artificial intelligence will be the chief equipment or tool in “the technology of the helmsman” to be used by these helmsmen in their mastery and control of other human beings who will be viewed as ‘resources’ and ‘disposables’. The ‘values’ rooted in technology itself have provided the “open region” to allow artificial intelligence to come into being, just as those ‘values’ have allowed handphones and computers to come into being.

The common instrumental view of technology sees technology as a ‘tool’ or ‘equipment’ like any other and that it can be used for good or ill, and this view persists with regard to artificial intelligence which is also seen as an instrument or tool.  As is discussed in this blog, we have seen that technology is more of a “fate”; it is a mode (way or manner) of being in the world that has arisen from particular historical conditions (Western European sciences) and social circumstances (contexts). The view of artificial intelligence examined here arrives from the view of reason (the principle of reason, logic, logistics) and nature (the environment as object) that came from those mastering Western sciences. Such a view cuts human beings off from any notion of a transcendent good (the Sun in Plato’s allegory of the Cave, the discussion in Title #2) and from any notion of a transcendent justice (a standard of justice other than that of our own making). One might say that artificial intelligence and its creation of its virtual worlds is a further degree from the truth and the light of the sun that Plato speaks about in his allegory of the Cave.

The situation in which we find ourselves currently seems obvious: we are faced with calamities concerning the environment, population, resources, and pollution if we continue to pursue the policies that we have pursued over the last few centuries. The attempts to deal with these interlocking emergencies will require a vast array of skills and knowledge; and that is what most of you are being educated towards. Technological mastery will need to be used to solve the problems that technology has created. Artificial intelligence will be used in the solution of these problems, so we can say that the primary mode of artificial intelligence will be action , the performance or doing of some task. The thinking involved in it will already have been completed, even the ‘thinking’ that originates from within itself. Its focus will be on applications.

The realization of the cybernetic future will find its place most securely in the medical profession, particularly the bio-medical field where the practical applications of artificial intelligence are being emphasized. What has been called “late stage capitalism” increasingly attempts to establish itself as “the mental health state” with the necessary array of dependent arts and sciences. The difficult choices which will be necessary in the future are discussed within the assumptions of the ‘values’ and ‘ideals’ which shall direct our creating of history, i.e., our actions .  If we are to deal with the future “humanely” (that is, in a “human” fashion), our acts of ‘free’ mastery in creating history must be decided within the light of certain ‘ideals’ so that we can preserve certain human ‘values’ and see that ‘quality of life’ and quantity (economic prosperity) is safeguarded and extended. Clearly, the problem of dealing with these future crises involves great possibilities of tyranny [1] and we must be careful that in meeting these choices and decisions we maintain the ‘values’ of free government.

The way we put the questions/themes that relate to the task of the future, the future of our students (your futures) as the leaders of that future, involves the use of concepts such as ‘values’, ‘ideals’, ‘persons’ or ‘our creating of history’. The use of these concepts obscures the fact that these very concepts have come forth from within the ‘technological world-view’ to give us an image of ourselves from within that within. These terms are used “unthinkingly” from within this “world-view” and do not allow us to gain the openness necessary to be able to discuss the questions in any meaningful way.

To carry out this questioning we have to look at “artificial intelligence as a fate” or a destining of human beings. In expressing the instrumental view of technology, we can see that artificial intelligence and the machines to which it is related are obviously instruments because their capacities have been built into them by human beings; and it is human beings who must set up the operating of those capacities for the purposes that they have determined. Artificial intelligence is the next step in that the machines themselves will develop their capacities from the programs installed within them, but those programs were initially written by human beings based on their ‘values’. All instruments or tools can potentially be used for wicked purposes and the more complex the instrument, the more complex the possible evils. But if we apprehend artificial intelligence as a neutral instrument or tool, can we be better able to determine rationally its potential dangers? That is clearly the first step in coping with these dangers. This view comes from those who uphold an instrumental view of technology. We can see that these dangers lie in the potential decisions human beings make about how and where to use artificial intelligence, and not to the inherent capacities of the machines that have artificial intelligence encoded within them. The research and creation of the machines and the creation of the programs for them is expensive; so it will, undoubtably, be the ‘values’ of the wealthy and powerful which will determine the ends for those machines.

This view is the instrumental view of most of us regarding technology and it is so strongly given to us that it seems like common sense itself. It is the box that we are given and which we must think outside of. We are given an historical situation which includes certain objective technological facts. It is up to us as human beings in our freedom to meet that situation and to shape it with our ‘values’ and ‘ideals’.

Despite the decency and common sense inherent in the instrumental view of technology, when we try to think about what is being said in this view, it becomes clear that that the products of technology such as computers, handphones, artificial intelligence and the various other machines and manifestations of technology are not being allowed to appear before us for what they really are.

Clearly, artificial intelligence and computers are more than their capacities or capabilities. Computers, for example, are put together from a variety of materials, beautifully fashioned by a vast apparatus of fashioners. Their existence has required generations of sustained efforts by chemists, metallurgists, and workers in mines and factories. They require a highly developed electronics industry and what lies behind that industry in the history of science and technique and their reciprocal relations. They have required that human beings wanted to understand nature, and thought the best way to do so was by putting it to the question as object so that it could reveal itself. They have required the discovery of modern algebra and the development of complex institutions for developing and applying algebra. Nor should this be seen as a one-sided relationship in which the institutions necessary to the development of the machines were left unchanged by the discovery of algebra

The existence of artificial intelligence has required that the clever of our society be trained within the massive assumptions about knowing and being and making (the values) which have made that algebra actual. Learning and education within such assumptions is not directed towards a “leading out” but towards “organizing within” (“education” from the Lat. educare “to lead out”; and the Gr. aitia “that which is responsible for or occasions” the “leading out”). This means and entails that those who rule any modern society (the helmsmen) will take the purposes of ruling increasingly to be congruent with this account of knowing. The requirements for the existence of computers and artificial intelligence is but part of the total historical situation which is given to us as modern human beings. The conditions of that historical situation are never to be conceived as static determinants (as something which cannot be changed), but as a dynamic interrelation of tightening determinations (the box gets smaller in terms of choices).

Human freedom is conceived in the strong sense of human beings as autonomous—the makers of our own laws and our own selves from out of our ‘values’. This is also a quite new conception. It is first thought systematically in the writings of the German philosopher Kant. It is also a conception without which the coming to be of our modern civilization would not and could not have been. But it is a conception the truth of which needs to be thought because it was not considered true by the wise men of many civilizations before our own.

In our Cartesian view of the world, we hold a view of the world with neutral instruments on one side and human autonomy on the other. But it is just this view that needs to be thought if we are concerned with understanding the essence of technology, and of understanding the essence of artificial intelligence and of modern instrumentality if we are to see these as being a ‘fate’ or ‘destiny’. When one thinks of ‘values’ and ‘ideals’ from within technology, one cannot ignore the continued homogenization of the central corporations in our everyday lives and the tremendous growth in their power over our lives, including the ability of driving us into wars. (The social media and tech giants and their reciprocal relations to the DOD are examples of this.)

Aristotle has pointed out that human beings are the ‘religious animal’, and the religion for most human beings who have lost any kind of transcendental faith in a god is the ‘belief in progress’. This belief can be described as the good progress of the race in the direction of the universal society of free and equal human beings, that is, towards the universal and homogeneous state. They assert that the technology, which comes out of the account of reason given in the modern European sciences, is the necessary and good means to that end. That account of reason assumes that there is something which we call ‘history’ over against nature, and that it is in that ‘history’ that human beings have acquired their rationality and their values. In the thought of the French philosopher Rousseau about the origins of human beings, the concept of reason as historical makes its extraordinary public arrival. Darwin’s Origin of Species is not possible without, first, the thought of Rousseau. Rousseau is the philosopher of the political Left at the moment.

The modern ‘physical’ sciences and the modern ‘human sciences’ have developed in mutual interpenetration, and we can only begin to understand that mutual interpenetration in terms of some common source from which both sciences found their grounding. That common source is “technology”.

To think ‘reasonably’ about the modern account of reason is of such difficulty because that account has structured our very thinking over the last centuries. Artificial intelligence has its roots in this account of reason (logic as logistics ). Because we are trying to understand reason in the very form of how we understand reason is what makes it so difficult. The very idea that ‘reason’ is that reason which allows us to conquer objective human and non-human nature controls our thinking about everything. The root of modern history lies in our experience of ‘reason’ and the interpenetration of the human and non-human sciences that grew from that root. It is an occurrence that has not yet been understood, and it is an event that must come to be thought.

The instrumental understanding of technology simply presents us with neutral instruments that we in our freedom can shape to our ‘values’ and ‘ideals’. But the very concepts of ‘values’ and ‘ideals’ come from the same form of reasoning that created artificial intelligence and built the computers upon which it is based. ‘Artificial intelligence’ and ‘values’ both come from that stance which summoned the world before it to show its reasons and bestowed ‘values’ on the world. Those ‘values’ are supposed to be the creations of human beings and have, linguistically, taken the place of the traditional concept of ‘good’ which was not created but recognized (See the discussion in title #2). Artificial intelligence does not present us with the neutral means for building any kind of society. All their alternative ‘ways’ lead towards the universal, homogeneous state. Our use of them is exercised within that mysterious modern participation in what we call ‘reason’, and it is this participation that is most difficult to think in its origins.

[1] Martin Heidegger in 1935 defined the political movement of National Socialism in Nazi Germany as “the meeting of modern man with a global technology”. Today, we define this coming together of human beings and technology as ‘globalization’. Having an opportunity to change this definition of National Socialism in 1953 with the publication of An Introduction to Metaphysics, Heidegger chose not to do so. This should be a warning to us.

(Note: While the thoughts presented here focus on artificial intelligence, consideration of Titles #1, #3, #5 and #6 will help provide a focus on the particular areas of knowledge that you might choose to examine using the principles in operation here.)

5. Is it always the case that “the world isn’t just the way I is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it” (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences .

Title #5 is somewhat tricky in its wording so this response will be directed towards how I interpret the title. We are directed to examine two specific areas of knowledge: history and the natural sciences. From the title, these two areas are to be examined from the role the “I is” plays in “how we understand the world” and what “we bring” to that world so that it may be interpreted and understood. The corollary question asked is “is it always the case?”. This corollary question invites us to examine the paradox or contradiction that is historicism and the nature of truth. Historicism is a way of viewing the world that sees what we call knowledge and any other social and cultural phenomenon as products of human activity in history. It is what we sometimes call “relativism”. Since knowledge is a product of the social and cultural forces at work at a certain period in history, nothing is ever “always the case”. The paradox or contradiction of historicism is whether or not historicism itself is “always the case” and thus the truth of the way and the how that things are including the “I is”.

In the wording of the title, the “I is” is contrasted with the “we are” with regard to what “ we understand” and what “ we bring” to the world in which we live. How we come to understand and interpret ourselves, the “I is”, is determined by the cultures and societies in which we happen to be born into i.e., the “we”. How we have come to understand what truth is and how we interpret and understand the world around us brings us to our own self-understanding and the questioning of that self-understanding. Our understanding and interpretation of the world will determine what we look up to and what we bow down to. The Greek philosopher Heraclitus once said: “Everything is full of gods”. Here in Bali, this statement is perfectly understandable. In the West, only a few people would have any comprehension of the statement. If there are no gods in things in the West, what has taken their place? A preliminary answer is: “we” have i.e., human beings as a species for it is “we” who create the things and bring them into being. To illustrate this, let’s look more closely at the areas of knowledge of history and the physical sciences or natural sciences.

We will begin our discussion of the natural sciences with two quotes from two of its greatest representatives: Albert Einstein, the founder of relativity physics, and Werner Heisenberg, the founder of the indeterminacy principle and quantum physics.

“Physical concepts are free creations of the human mind, and are not, however it may seem, uniquely determined by the external world.” -Albert Einstein

“What we observe is not nature in itself but nature exposed to our method of questioning.  Our scientific work in physics consists in asking questions about nature in the language that we possess and trying to get an answer from experiment by the means that are at our disposal.”–Werner Heisenberg

How we have come to understand and interpret the external world (predominantly in the West, but now worldwide) is through technology. To characterize what modern technology is, we can say that it is the disclosive looking that  disposes  of the things which it looks at. Technology is the framework that arranges things in a certain way, sees things in a certain way, and assigns things to a certain order: what we call  mathematical projection . This is what Einstein means by stating that “physical concepts are free creations of the human mind”. This is what we “bring” to the things. It is a viewing of things in a certain way i.e., within the framework of the mathematical projection.

The looking (the  theory ) is our way of knowing which  corresponds  to the self-disclosure of things as belonging to a certain order that is determined from within the framework or mathematical projecting itself. From this looking, human beings see in things a certain disposition; the things belong to a certain order that is seen as appropriate to the things i.e. our areas of knowledge. The seeing of things within this frame provides the impetus to investigate the things in a certain manner.  That manner is the  calculable.  Things are revealed as the calculable. (This is Heisenberg’s ‘manner of questioning’.) Modern technology is the disclosure of things in the natural sciences as subject to calculation. Modern technology sets science going; it is not a subsequent application of science and mathematics, the ‘equipment’ and ‘tools’ of technology.  “Technology” is the outlook on things that science needs to get started, the manner of “questioning” that Heisenberg speaks of. Modern technology is the viewing/insight into the essence of things of our world as coherently calculable. Science disposes of the things into a certain calculable order . Again, it is what we ‘bring’ to the things.   Science is the theory of the real, where the truth of the things that  are , views and reveals those things as disposables.

Technology as our way of being in the world (for both the “I is” and the “we are”) has been accomplished by the determination of what is as ‘object’ and the judgement regarding what we conceive to be the essence of truth, or how things reveal themselves when understood as objects. This is the same for both natural science and history, as well as the human sciences. This technology grounds our age in that through a specific interpretation and understanding of what is (beings/things as objects) and through a specific comprehension of truth (as correspondence, correctness), it gives to our age the basis or ground (its history) upon which it has been and is essentially formed. This basis or grounding holds complete domination over all the things/beings that come to distinguish our age in that it provides the interpretations of what those things/beings are. It is our metaphysics as technology that forms the paradigm that determines how we perceive things/beings in our age and, thus, the methodologies of our sciences as well as our understanding of history. This paradigm is the understanding of the environment, including our whole being-in-the-world (shared knowledge, history) as object. Technology is the meta-physic of the age, the modern age.

History is different from the other Human Sciences, or indeed other sciences in general, in that the knowers or researchers cannot directly observe the past in the same way that the object of research can be observed and studied in the Natural and Human Sciences. We “bring” more of ourselves to our interpretations and understandings of history and its narratives than we do to the narratives of physics, chemistry, and biology, for instance.

“Historiology” is the study of history in general, the search for what its essence is, what its purpose is. It is said by some that the purpose of history is “prophecy”, the ability to predict the future and to prepare for that future. “Historiography”, that is, a study of the writings of history, is not a study of all of the past, but rather a study of those traces or artifacts that have been deemed relevant and meaningful by historians; and this choosing of artifacts and evidence is the most important aspect of the study of history as it attempts to aspire to “scientific research”. This “selection process” is primarily determined and driven by how the “I is” has been previously determined prior to the selection and classifying of artifacts, and it determines what will be “brought” to those artifacts. This is where the importance of “shared knowledge” or “historical knowledge” comes into play; what we call our “shared knowledge” is “history” or “historical knowledge”, and what we choose to select is determined beforehand by our  culture .

In the USA, for example, the attempt to give its historical narrative from only a “white selection process” will not shed much light on the truth of that history, particularly its Civil War where more Americans died than in all the wars in which it has since become involved up to the present day. This denial of the history of African-Americans as part of its American history in itself is another indicator of the current American descent towards fascism and tyranny, which begins with the denial of the “otherness” to other human beings, the failure to give other human beings their “due”. (See the discussion in Title #3.)

In the modern, the distinction between the personal or the “I is” knowledge and understanding and our shared or historical knowledge (what we understand and bring to what is called ‘knowledge’) tends to lose its crucial significance due to our belief in progress. It appears that we tacitly assign the same cognitive status to both historical and personal knowledge and this impacts how we understand history and what we feel its importance is to our futures. What we deem to be “historical” first appears and coincides with  ratio, calculation,  and  thought  understood as ratio and calculation. What is chosen to be called “history” arises with a pre-determined understanding and definition of what human being is (the  animale rationale ) and this, in turn, determines what “will be held to account” in the selection of what is deemed to be important in relation to that understanding of human being.

The question of whether history is an art or a science is as old as “historiography” itself. Aristotle in his  Poetics  distinguishes between the poet and the historian, and the philosopher and the historian. The historian presents what has happened while the poet is concerned with the kind of things that might, or could, happen: “therefore poetry is more philosophic and more serious than history, for poetry states rather the universals, history however states the particulars”. ( Poetics  1451a36-b11) The poet aspires to “prophecy”. But isn’t History’s chief purpose to provide guidance for future actions? History might be called pre-philosophic in that it concerns itself with particular human beings, particular cities, individual kingdoms, or empires, etc. The historian must choose between what she has determined to be the important and the unimportant things when writing her report, and in her choices illuminate the universal in the individual event so that the purpose of her recording is meant to be a possession for all times. The acquisition of knowledge is acquired through the universal. You have done much the same in your Exhibition (if you have done it correctly). The presentation is analogical.

The spirit of  historicism  (the understanding of  time  as history) permeates every aspect of every text and every approach to the study of and knowledge of the things of our world, and it is particularly present in the IB program. Plato viewed time as “the moving image of eternity”, an infinite accretion of “nows”; we tend to view time as the “progress” of the species towards ever greater perfection, much like how we view the latest models of our technological devices and gadgets as being more “fitted” towards accomplishing our ends and purposes. Our “evolution” and “adaptation”, we believe, are signs of our progress and growth as a species as we move towards ever greater “perfection”, both moral and physical. It is sometimes called “the ascent of man”, but such a concept of human being, as an “ascending” creature, is only possible within the technological world-view.

When we speak of History as an area of knowledge, we are speaking of “human history” not the history of rocks or plants or other objects that are also part of our world. These are covered in the Group 4 subjects as part of the Natural Sciences. History as an area of knowledge deals with human actions in time whether by individuals or communities so it is considered a “human science” for the most part, and the approach to the study of it is a “scientific” one. This attempted approach to the study of history is the same as that carried out in the Natural Sciences wherein history is looked at “objectively” and demands are made of it to give us its reasons. We seek for the “causes” of events. This approach has given rise to one of the complaints against history and how it is studied nowadays: we can only learn  about  the past; we cannot learn  from  it. Nor do we today feel that we need to. This dearth of knowledge of history is most in evidence in America, and this is not surprising as America is the heartland of technological dynamism.

6. Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Title #6 is very similar to title #5, but it differs from that title in that it focuses on the “selection” process involved in the Natural Sciences and another area of knowledge in “the acquisition of knowledge”. In title #5 we noted that the selection process deals with the general or universal and from it comes the acquisition of knowledge i.e., an explanation is provided for the particular object under scrutiny through the application of the categories that correspond with the object.

In Title # 3 we discussed the meaning of acquisition. “Acquisition” means to ‘get’, ‘to grasp’, to take hold of something and take possession of it, to make it one’s own. It means ‘that which is responsible for the acquiring or getting and taking possession of something’. Our wonderful phrase in English, “I get it”, is an example of this grasping and taking possession of something. Usually it is the beginning of our understanding of something, our “shared knowledge” (historical knowledge) of something, and in the sciences this might be the theoretical knowledge that gets the research started. What we grasp or take hold of from others in our discourses with them is “opinion” not knowledge, whether it be from those in our communities who are called ‘experts’ or from those who dwell in the murky communities of QAnon. (The communities are ‘murky’ because they are ‘a-nonymous’ i.e., they have ‘no name’; and, thus, they have no desire to be brought to light, to be brought out into the open which the naming of things does by nature.) This acquiring of what we think is knowledge becomes part of ourselves and who we think we are; and this, in turn, will determine the actions that we will choose to take i.e., the ethics.

Werner Heisenberg, one of the founders of quantum physics, made the following statement regarding the current position of modern physics and the natural sciences in general:

“What we observe is not nature in itself but nature exposed to our method of questioning.  Our scientific work in physics consists in asking questions about nature in the language that we possess and trying to get an answer from experiment by the means that are at our disposal.”

In the natural sciences, the method of questioning which Heisenberg speaks of is determined by the mathematical projection which disposes of nature in itself. Because numbers don’t lie (or so we believe), they are projected towards nature in such a way that an “experiment” can be devised wherein results or outcomes can be determined in mathematical statements and the correctness of the numerical applications can be determined. If the results correspond to the mathematical projections, we believe we have acquired knowledge.

Physics constrains nature in its very way of posing nature, in its theoretical stance. Nature is required to report in a certain way and can only report in this way, and the way is determined by the principle of reason expressed in the mathematical projection. In modern atomic physics, unfortunately, Nature is not reporting according to our expectations and so we speak of the crisis of science as to what it conceives knowledge to be. We cannot have knowledge of nature in the way that we have traditionally understood knowledge and in the way that we have traditionally understood Nature. (See the quote from Heisenberg above).

The rigor of mathematical physical science is exactitude. Science cannot proceed randomly. All events, if they are at all to enter into representation as events of nature, must be defined beforehand as spatio-temporal magnitudes of motion. Such defining is accomplished through measuring, with the help of number and calculation. Mathematical research into nature is not exact because it calculates with precision; it must calculate in this way because its adherence to its object-sphere (the objects which it investigates, its selection process) has the character of exactitude.  This is the heart of the selection process. In contrast, the Group 3 subjects, the Human Sciences, must be inexact in order to remain rigorous.  A living thing can be grasped as a mass in motion, but then it is no longer apprehended as living. The projecting and securing of the object of study in the Human Sciences is of another kind and is much more difficult to execute than is the achieving of rigor in the “exact sciences” of the Group 4 subjects.

While there are some scientists who are genuinely motivated by the search for truth and the acquisition of knowledge in their “selection process” of what object they will study in their research, many are motivated by “vested interests” (where they will find the greatest source of funding) or social recognition and prestige, what may be called “Nobel Prize-itis”. In Book VI of his Republic , the Greek philosopher Plato stated that those who would receive the highest recognition in the Cave would be those who could predict what shadows would follow in the order that they were displayed on the walls of the Cave. On the other hand, some scientists often select their objects of study based on their personal curiosity and passion. They may be drawn to specific topics or phenomena that intrigue them intellectually or align with their expertise. Such curiosity and passion, however, is rarer in the sciences than it is in the Arts.

There are some scientists who consider the relevance and significance of the object of study within their field and the broader scientific community in general, and thus in their societies. They seek topics that address important questions, fill gaps in knowledge, or have practical applications and such scientists are usually looking at the recognition and prestige which could come from such studies. Researchers review existing scientific literature to understand the current state of knowledge in their field. They look for areas where further investigation is needed, unresolved questions, or opportunities for advancement.

The Human Sciences could be called “The Science of Humans”, the knowledge that we have already grounded with regard to what human being is and what human beings are, the starting points from which we can begin our journey towards understanding Human Being and human beings. This “science” originates in, has its grounds in, what we now call “biology”, “the science of” (“ logy ”) “life” ( bios ) or living things. The Human Sciences, Individuals and Societies, must take as their starting point the findings of the Natural Sciences. In order for the Human Sciences to begin their study,  what  human beings are and  how  they are must already be defined in some preliminary way through the findings of the Natural Sciences. This way of viewing is Western European in origin. Traditionally, it was known as “psychology”. Human beings, as the selected object of study of the Human Sciences, have been defined as animale rationale, the animal that is capable of reason which is demonstrated in its ability to give reasons . We believe our knowledge, and thus our being, comes from the “rendering of an account” of some thing based on the principle of reason: “I know be-cause”, the cause “is”, the cause “being”. We believe we attain the truth of some thing, knowledge of it, through the principle of reason, primarily through one of its sub-principles, cause and effect, and the  logic  upon which the principle of causality is based.

Two opposing views are present today and are related to the religions or faiths of both camps and determine the “selection process” of what aspect of human being will be the object of consideration: human beings are either the products of modification and chance (evolution) or human beings are “created” beings that have a purpose and destiny for their being. i.e. they have an  essence.  This clash shows itself in the views of human beings in the evolutionary camp as “ids” (“things”, “it”s) or “Selves”, or in the “created camp” in the view that human beings are not “their own”, as Socrates expresses so beautifully in the Platonic dialogue  Phaedo  and elsewhere.

Given the vast possibilities and potentialities of possible objects of study in the Human Sciences, practical considerations, such as the availability of resources, funding, time, and expertise, play a role in selecting the object of study among the many products of human activities. In the work environment, human beings are looked upon as “human resources”, for instance, an innocuous sounding term until thought is given to it.

Since the ultimate goal of the technological viewing of the world is cybernetics , the Human Sciences of most interest to the powerful will be those that aid in the unlimited mastery of human beings over other human beings. These will receive the funding and the ability to assess the necessary tools, equipment, or access to specific environments or specimens to conduct their research in the human sciences. It is this viewing, rooted in the technological, that causes me grave concerns about the advent and outcomes of artificial intelligence.

The saying “One mind is enough for a million hands” indicates what has become of the collaborative function that predominates within the bureaucracies and institutions created through technology and determines what the choice of object of study will be (if it can be said to be a choice) in the Human Sciences. Because scientists and researchers need to eat, funding agencies or institutions will also have specific priorities or grant programs that steer scientists towards particular areas of research.

In many instances, scientists will look to solve the many problems that technology itself has created, and so doing may consider the potential societal impact of their research that will give them the recognition and prestige that they desire. They may choose to study objects or phenomena that have practical implications, such as improving human mental health, since technology has resulted in mass meaninglessness for so many human beings (and the sense of “victimhood” which goes along with it). They may address environmental challenges such as the climate change caused primarily by the applications of technology’s equipment and techniques. In doing so, they may become involved in informing policy decisions through their knowledge and understanding of political science.

Share this:

Author: John R. Butler

Retired Teacher View all posts by John R. Butler

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

• May 20, 2023

Unpacking the 2023 November TOK Titles: A Comprehensive IB Solved Guide

The November 2023 titles for the IB Theory of Knowledge Essay have been released! Let's face it – the TOK essay can be very intimidating. With so many topics to choose from and so many ideas bouncing around, it can be hard to know where to begin. That's where we come in. In this post, we'll take a closer look at each of the titles and give you some tips for approaching them.

General Tips to Unpacking a Title

Whenever we approach a prompt, we always want to think in terms of perspectives and counter-perspectives (for those who are familiar with the old syllabus, these were previously known as claims and counterclaims). This allows us to structure the essay within the two selected AOKs, creating four paragraphs directly addressing the title and with consideration of varying perspectives on the title. While the final conclusion that we draw will likely lie somewhere in the middle, or argue that each perspective is more/less correct in different circumstances, it is often helpful to think of the two extremes first before trying to come up with a more nuanced conclusion.

So let’s get into unpacking them – here is everything you need to know about each of the November 2023 TOK Essay titles:

Title 1: Are facts alone enough to prove a claim? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

Recommended AOKs: Natural Sciences, Human Sciences, History

For this title, the perspective and counter-perspective are straightforward – either facts alone are enough to prove a claim, or they are not.

Some ideas to think about which support the first perspective:

Facts are objective – By providing objective evidence for a claim, facts can be a highly reliable form of evidence to support claims made by knowers. This objectivity allows for the same claim to be proven across time, in different cultures and by unique knowers.

Facts allow for conclusions to be drawn through logic – By combining an array of established facts, deductive reasoning can be utilised to draw conclusions about the world and produce new knowledge. Often facts form the premises from which knowledge claims can be made, allowing a knower to prove a claim by first establishing a series of interconnected facts.

Facts can be tested – This is particularly important for science-based AOKs which rely upon falsification as an important method of producing new knowledge. Since facts can be tested, the veracity of a knower’s claim is always available to be disproven by empirical evidence.

For your counter-perspective, you have a far greater degree of freedom in your discussion. This is where you can really differentiate your essay from others, as it is your job to decide which other important elements beyond facts alone may be necessary to prove a claim. Some ideas from us:

Opinions – Whilst opinions lack the objectivity of facts, they are often important to proving knowledge claims, as these claims are often unable to be proven by facts alone. Rather inferences must be drawn to create meaning from facts. This can be illustrated through a very simple claim: Imagine for instance that we were trying to prove the claim that Germany were responsible for World War I. Whilst we could drawn upon facts, such as the fact that they issued a blank cheque to Austria-Hungary or the fact that they invaded Belgium in August 1914, ultimately we rely upon the opinions of historians in making a judgement on how important this was in the context of the war.

Personal Experience – Whilst personal experiences only provide anecdotal evidence and cannot allow us to draw broader conclusions, they may be necessary to prove a claim which involves emotion or personal beliefs.

Creativity – Creative thinking may be necessary to prove claims, particularly in the sciences, where facts alone are insufficient. For instance, scientific theories, whilst based in fact, are often dependent on analogies, comparisons and metaphor to explain abstract concepts for which there may not yet be any measurable or empirical evidence.

Title 2: If “the mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s and the poet’s, must be beautiful” (G.H. Hardy), how might this impact the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.

This title is far more intricate than the others, relying heavily upon the definitions you impose upon key terms. The concept of the “mathematician’s patterns” and the term “beautiful” must be defined in the opening of the essay, as this will restrict the scope of your knowledge exploration. The way in which we would recommend splitting up this topic would be to first discuss the impact upon the production of knowledge in mathematics and then within the Arts. Some ideas for the perspectives and counter-perspectives which you may explore include:

Beauty in Mathematics – You will want to consider the importance of beauty in Mathematics. This is not referring to beauty in the traditional sense but perhaps considering other ways in which Mathematics may be considered beautiful such as in its way of transforming complex real-world problems into simple symbols which can be solved. This can impact the production of knowledge as mathematicians may choose to ignore solutions which are complex and rough – in other words, ‘mathematically ugly’.

Beauty in Art – In discussing this AOK, you may consider the debate between aestheticism and purpose within the Arts – In other words, is Art merely supposed to ‘look good’ or does it have a greater purpose, and how does this relate to the production of knowledge in and through the Arts.

Title 3: In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Recommended AOKs: Human Sciences and Natural Sciences/History/Math

This title presents a very contemporary issue which is the questioning of experts and trust in the knowledge produced by experts. Nonetheless, there is a clear perspective and counter-perspective presented by this title – it is either more dangerous to follow experts unquestioningly or more dangerous to ignore them completely.

Some ideas relevant to the first perspective:

Evidence over Experts – By following experts unquestioningly, rather than examining the quality of their evidence and research methods, we fall into the trap of making arguments from authority without confirming that their conclusions are actually correct.

Subjective Experiences – While experts are helpful in drawing general conclusions/findings about the world, they do not account for subjective, individual experiences. This is particularly relevant in the Human Sciences, as theories and claims of human behaviour may not apply to all people due to the uniqueness of humans.

Lack of Progress – It is only by questioning established paradigms and claims made by existing experts that we are able to progress and acquire new knowledge. If all experts are followed unquestioningly, there can be no overhaul of existing knowledge when necessary.

Some ideas relevant to the counter-perspective:

Established Research Systems – Experts are trained in effective research methodologies and have systems to maximise the reliability of the claims they make. By ignoring experts, we are instead relying upon knowledge of laypeople whose claims have not been rigorously assessed for their veracity.

Manipulation and Logical Fallacies – By ignoring the claims of experts and instead acquiring knowledge through prominent figures such as celebrities and the media, we expose ourselves to manipulation and the array of logical fallacies employed by these individuals who have their own agenda beyond the dissemination of knowledge.

Knowledge Framework – Experts develop knowledge frameworks which can guide the production of new knowledge. By ignoring experts, we are often left to deal with problems on a case-by-case basis which can lead to a lack of consistency and structure within the knowledge which is acquired.

Title 4: Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

Recommended AOKs: History, Arts, Human Sciences

This title has a focus on context and values, integral elements of the knowledge framework within the new syllabus. It also has two clear perspectives to be explored – the claim that it is problematic or the claim that it is not, keeping in mind that across both perspectives, it must be specified how knowledge is shaped by individual values.

Some ideas for the first perspective:

Bias – The shaping of knowledge by one’s individual values can create bias which may impede the reliability of knowledge produced through the lens of these values.

Subjectivity – If subjective beliefs founded in one’s values are imported into the production of knowledge which should be based on facts and evidence, this can be problematic for this knowledge.

Lack of Diversity/One-Sided Knowledge – When entire banks of knowledge are produced by individuals from the same background, culture, beliefs or school of thought, this can lead to the omission of other perspectives on an issue, which can limit the knowledge which is produced.

Individual Perspective are Important – It is often important for a knower to incorporate their own personal perspective in the production of knowledge as this is ultimately the only way in which interpretations and opinions beyond mere facts can be drawn.

Knowledge about the Knower – We can often learn more about a knower, their values and the social norms of their time when evaluating knowledge claims which are shaped by individual values, providing a second layer of ‘knowledge within knowledge’.

Specific Knowledge – Whilst not broadly applicable to people or contexts with different values, knowledge produced by those with particular individual values can be more specific and applicable to knowers within the same value system. This form of ‘insider knowledge’ may be shaped by the personal experiences of an individual, which is an asset to the production of knowledge rather than a hinderance.

Title 5: Is it always the case that “the world isn’t just the way it is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it” (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.

This title touches upon the debate between objective and relativistic views of knowledge and the world. The phrase ‘is it always the case’ allows us to derive two perspectives to explore – it either is always the case or it is not. The first perspective requires arguments which explain why this may always be the case, whereas the second only requires you to provide some exceptions/circumstances in which this would not be the case.

Interpretation creates Meaning – It may be argued that all elements of the world must be interpreted and doing so involves the unique lens of each individual knower. In this way, what we bring to the production of knowledge is our own distinct interpretation of the world around us.

Questioning creates Meaning – We could also consider how the questions which knowers ask are unique and based upon our own individual understanding of the world. This means that something new is created each time a new knower attempts to understand the world, as the questions asked and curiosity of each individual provides a distinct approach to knowledge.

Some ideas for the counter-perspective:

Objectivity Exists – It may be argued that there are some elements of the world which are fixed, unquestionable and objective. These components of knowledge are not dependent upon the interpretation of the individual, as there should be objective standards from which everyone should draw the same conclusion.

Repeatability – Particularly in the Natural Sciences, there are some elements of knowledge which are repeatable and not reliant upon the interpretation of the individual knower. This concept of repeatability is a foundational tenet of the sciences and the production of new knowledge of the world around us.

Title 6: Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Recommended AOKs: Natural Sciences and Human Sciences/History/Arts

This title questions the way in which we determine whether a piece of information is significant for knowledge. Since this is a ‘how’ question, there are many perspectives which can be explored, rather than a clear binary of perspectives. Some ideas from us:

Selection through Merit – This concept is particularly relevant to the Natural Sciences, as the theories which are ultimately deemed as significant are those which are not falsified. This merit-based approach pits scientific theories against each other to determine which are significant for the acquisition of knowledge.

Selection through Structure and Processes – By establishing set systems and procedures for filtering the vast amount of information available within an AOK, we can make selections as to which knowledge is significant.

Selection through Applicability – When judging what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge, a knower may have to consider the vast amount of information and decipher which piece of information is most applicable to their context, values or specific circumstances.

So there you have it! By now, you should have a better idea about which TOK essay title stands out the most to you and maybe even a few ideas about what to write. But where do you begin? Don't worry, we understand that writing a Theory of Knowledge essay can be a daunting task, but with the help of our expert IB tutors, you'll be on your way to success in no time. Plus, with online IB tutoring available, you can get the help you need from anywhere in the world. Don't let the TOK essay stress you out – contact us today to learn more about our IB tutoring services and how we can help you succeed in your IB studies.

IB Solved: Achieve Your IB Dreams and Secure Your Future!

• Internal Assessment Guides

Recent Posts

The Secrets to Success in the Theory of Knowledge (TOK) Essay

November 2023 TOK Essay Titles Explained with Examples

What happened to this post? HackIB has been acquired by MyIBTutor . All content is now available on the MyIBTutor Blog with more exciting IB content to come! Click here to see it for yourself!

The prescribed titles for the November 2023 TOK Essay has been released! Here are all the titles with detailed explanation and examples to get you started:

• Are facts alone enough to prove a claim? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.
• If “the mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s and the poet’s, must be beautiful” (G.H. Hardy), how might this impact the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.
• In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.
• Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.
• Is it always the case that “the world isn’t just the way I is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it” (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.
• Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Below are the explanations. If you need help with TOK concepts and how to write a good essay, check out the resources in the TOK subject page!

To see the titles explained, read the full article for free on MyIBTutor .

Share this:, one response to “november 2023 tok essay titles explained with examples”.

Hi Daniel, I really appreciate your work. You are a genius!

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar

Theory of knowledge

Theory of knowledge (TOK) is assessed through an exhibition and a 1,600 word essay.

It asks students to reflect on the nature of knowledge, and on how we know what we claim to know.

TOK is part of the International Baccalaureate® (IB) Diploma Programme (DP) core, and is mandatory for all students.

Learn more about theory of knowledge . You can also find examples of TOK essay titles and read about how the IB sets deadlines for TOK .

You may also be interested in the other components of the DP core: creativity, activity, service (CAS) and the extended essay .

Learn more about TOK in a DP workshop for teachers . 

DP subject briefs

Find out about what each subject offers within the Diploma Programme (DP).

Our DP subject briefs—for both standard and higher level—contain information about core requirements, aims and assessment.

• Explore the DP subject briefs

May 2023 TOK essay prescribed title #5 – key terms

Published by author on september 27, 2022 september 27, 2022.

Once you get the set of prescribed titles for your cohort, the first step is going through each one and analyzing the key terms.

5. Are visual representations always helpful in the communication of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics.

“ Are visual representations always helpful ” – Make sure that your essay clearly answers this question.  Your investigation of different AOKs and different specific examples throughout your answer may lead to multiple answers to the question which is perfectly fine.  Your essay does not have to have one definitive answer to this question – in fact an essay that has one definitive answer to this question is likely flawed.

“ visual representations ” – charts, diagrams, models of the atom, maps, a painting of a WWI battle are a few examples of visual representations. Models of the atom, for example, can be helpful in explaining some characteristics of the atom but the model may simply or exclude key aspects of the atom.  A painting of the battle of the Somme in WWI may provide some information about it, but what if the painter was not at the battle or did not even fight in WWI?  Even if the painter had been in the battle, his or her depiction of the situation might be affected by bias, limited information, patriotism, etc.

“ always ” – there may be nothing in TOK that you could argue is “always” anything.  Successful essays avoid one-sided arguments and should look at a situation and a prescribed title from a variety of angles / perspectives.

“ helpful ” – if you choose May 2023 TOK prescribed title #5 you could view “helpful” in a number of different ways.  However, all of these ways should be directly connected to knowledge . Look closely at specific examples where visual representations are helpful or are not helpful in the production or acquisition of knowledge.   

“ communication of knowledge ” – there are many different ways in which knowledge can be communicated. Analyze specific examples where visual representations play a role in communicating knowledge and look at the precise way knowledge is communicated. Make sure you can evaluate whether or not it is helpful.

TOK prescribed titles frequently use phrases such as the “sharing of knowledge” and the “acquisition of knowledge” but May 2023 prescribed title #5 may be the first time that the phrase “communication of knowledge” has been used.  “Communication of knowledge” can include both “sharing” and “acquisition” though. 

May 2023 TOK essay #5 should only discuss the AOK(s) mentioned in the prescribed title.

Related Posts

May 2023 tok essay prescribed title #3 specific example – indigenous people of northern japan.

Article: “Japan’s forgotten indigenous people” http://www.bbc.com/travel/story/20200519-japans-forgotten-indigenous-people In the Japanese school curriculum (set by the central government in Tokyo) there is very little time and space spent on the Ainu, an indigenous group that has almost Read more…

May 2023 Prescribed Title #1

May 2023 tok essay prescribed title #1 specific example – japanese myth on the birth of japan..

The extract below is a translated Japanese creation myth in an ancient text named Kojiki. The original text is written in an type of writing that the vast majority of modern Japanese people cannot read. Read more…

May 2023 TOK essay prescribed title #4 specific example – photo of an execution during the Vietnam War.

Eddie Adams’ iconic Vietnam War photo: What happened next https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-42864421 Consider the different aspects where is there “a little knowledge” regarding the photo and the actual incident. Then look into the larger question that is Read more…

Privacy Overview

What are your chances of acceptance?

Calculate for all schools, your chance of acceptance.

Your chancing factors

Extracurriculars.

Guide to the TOK Essay

What’s covered:.

• What is Theory of Knowledge (TOK)?
• What is the Theory of Knowledge Essay?

How is the Theory of Knowledge Essay Scored?

How to structure your theory of knowledge essay.

The International Baccalaureate Diploma Programme (IB/IBDP) is a rigorous and rewarding internationally based educational program that offers courses in numerous studies, from humanities to chemistry. Students take part in a two-year curriculum that includes external examinations, internal assessments, research papers and community service hours. Essentially, students will have to do a bit of everything, especially with IB’s core, which is CAS, TOK, and the extended essay (EE). Understanding how TOK, IB’s flagship class, is assessed with its essay is important to success in the course overall. 

What is Theory Of Knowledge (TOK)?

Theory of Knowledge is IB’s way of introducing a more intuitive way of thinking into classrooms. TOK is at its surface as simple as it sounds: you essentially learn the “what” and “why” of how we learn and understand knowledge. In order to assess students of their skills in TOK, IB uses an essay and a presentation. The essay makes up 67% of your total TOK score, making it the most important task to focus on for getting a high score. 

What is the Theory Of Knowledge Essay?

The TOK essay is a 1600 word essay written about topics usually given to students from their teachers from a list of numerous options. It is an essay that promotes arguments and counterarguments for the topic at hand. Understanding your ways of knowing (WOKs) and areas of knowledge (AOKs) is extremely crucial before you even start choosing a topic to write on, as your essay will revolve around and structure itself based on these two concepts. Being able to demonstrate higher-level thinking and using examples to solidify the points you make in your essay is also important. Additionally, you’ll need to reference every source of information that you use, since that is something examiners look for as well.

As said earlier, 67% of your grade is from the essay, and your overall TOK score receives a letter grade using a calculated score out of thirty. Your essay score and presentation score are each out of ten. The grades for your TOK presentation and essay are determined by sending material to the board of IB, from which they designate a grader/examiner to read your essay and grade based on a rubric that determines the level of knowledge you exhibit in your writing.

The following formula should better explain how to find your TOK grade. 

(presentation score) + (essay score * 2) = overall score out of 30

The grade boundaries out of 30 that determine your letter grade can vary each year so checking in with your school for the most recent ones is the best course of action, but an example set would be like this:

Once you have a letter grade for IB, your extended essay, which is another part of the core, is also included into a larger grading schema to calculate your core score, which is three additional points required to complete and earn the diploma. The following table details this grade further:

Doing well in the core is important to passing IB and getting three points out of the total 45 attainable points. 

There’s a trick that most IB students use in writing the TOK essay, and it boils down to understanding four key components of learning:

• Content : Understanding knowledge issues
• Clarity : Structuring your essay in a legible and clear/easy to read manner
• Creativity : Using your personal ways of thinking and applications of knowledge specific to your understanding of the knowledge issue
• Critical Thinking : Using a counter argument for every argument you have to analyze your own claims constantly 

Dividing your actual essay into three main chunks helps, starting with an introduction. Your introduction should be where you state your knowledge question, the central point of your essay, and you should make use of jargon specific to the concept. As the basis of your essay, the introduction should be where you form claims and counterclaims that either support or challenge the knowledge question through heavy analysis and evaluation. 

The body of the essay follows the introduction, and it is where most of the conceptual analysis of your knowledge question takes place. Every argument and its counterargument should have a dedicated paragraph of its own, and make sure to not jump back and forth too much throughout the essay. to avoid creating messy transitions for the reader and potentially harming your score. Understanding the essay from the reader’s point of view is important, as it will help you better understand how to structure the body of your essay.

A conclusion in the TOK essay is mainly for finding closure among the numerous arguments that have been taking place thus far in the essay. Make sure to summarize but not repeat previous information entirely to refresh the reader. A conclusion should essentially loop back to the beginning of the essay, the knowledge question. The knowledge question’s answer should be the conclusion and the stopping point of the essay, and by now the answer you provide should be backed by paragraphs of supporting claims and counterclaims. If done right, concluding the essay can be how you earn most of your points. 

Start Early

Starting early is an obvious and effective advantage to students. Aside from TOK, let alone the presentation, IB has substantial work that requires focus and allocated time dedicated to it, such as external examinations and the extended essay. These tasks are equally as important as the TOK essay, so starting your outlining, drafting or even just planning early will set you up for success.

Send Your Drafts to Your Teacher

Your TOK teacher is a great resource for drafting essays and making edits to perfect your final product. Making use of time outside of the classroom to catch your teacher for a quick review of your essay could be a bigger advantage than you realize. Making use of an outside perspective is essential to forming a great essay. 

While your final IB grade isn’t as important as you’d think regarding college admissions, understanding how to pass TOK and using the lifelong practices you’ll learn in the class is even more important. TOK creates students who think outside conventional methods, making them excellent candidates in the eyes of college admissions offices. Taking TOK and showing proof of understanding it as well as capability of academic rigor is what colleges are looking for. For more information on how your chances of college admissions might look, use CollegeVine’s admissions calculator !

Related CollegeVine Blog Posts

IB TOK Essay examples

Type a search phrase to find the most relevant TOK Essay examples for you

Not sure what to search for? You can always look through our example Theory of Knowledge coursework below for inspiration.

All TOK Essay Examples

Filter exemplars, for artists and natural scientists, which is more important: what can be explained or what cannot be explained discuss with reference to the arts and the natural sciences., does it matter if our acquisition of knowledge happens in "bubbles" where some information and voices are excluded discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge., want to get full marks for your tok essay allow us to review it for you 🎯, is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge., are visual representations always helpful in the communication of knowledge discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics., fast track your coursework with mark schemes moderated by ib examiners. upgrade now 🚀, to what extent is the knowledge we produce determined by the methodologies we use discuss with reference to history and one area of knowledge., tok essay: 5. “how can we distinguish between good and bad interpretations discuss with reference to the arts and one other area of knowledge”, 如果我们是在排除某些信息和声音的“信息同温层”里获取知识，这有关系吗请参考两个知识领域展开你的应答。, does it matter if our knowledge acquisition happens in "bubbles" where some information and voices are excluded discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge., is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge, do you agree that it is “astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power” (bertrand russell) discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge., does it matter if our acquisition of knowledge happens in “bubbles” where some information and voices are excluded discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge., to what extent is the knowledge weproduce determined by the methodologieswe use, for artists and natural scientists, which is more important: what can be explained or what cannot be explained discuss with reference to the arts and natural science., êtes-vous d'accord qu'il est "étonnant que si peu de connaissance puissent nous donner autant de pouvoir" (bertrand russell) - discutez cette question en faisant référence aux sciences naturelles et à un autre domaine de la connaissance, est-il important que notre acquisition des connaissances se fasse dans des « bulles » où certaines informations et certaines voix sont exclues discutez cette question en faisant référence à deux domaines de la connaissance., to what extent is the knowledge we produce determined by the methodologies we use discuss with reference to history and one other area of knowledge., is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge discuss with reference to two area of knowledge, are visual representations always helpful in communicating knowledge discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics., are visual representations always useful in communication of knowledge discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics., for artists and natural scientists which is more important: what can be explained or what cannot be explained, is replication necessary in the production of knowledge discuss with reference to two aoks., do you agree that it is "astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power" (bertrand russell) discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge., is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge.

Mastering ToK Essay Structure: A Comprehensive Guide

• December 5, 2023
• Student Support , ToK Essay

Introduction to ToK Essay Structure

December is the busy essay writing season for May session schools! I’ve been reading ToK Essays from students all over the world in which I am frequently seeing problems of structuring the ToK Essay effectively. This post aims to address the often-asked question, “ How do I structure my ToK Essay? “

The International Baccalaureate (IB) doesn’t prescribe a single structure for the ToK Essay. They require that you “ provide a clear, coherent and critical exploration of the essay title ” (IB ToK Essay Assessment Instrument, 2020) Achieving this requires a well-thought-out structure that fosters clarity, coherence, and critical exploration. Let’s break down the essentials that every ToK Essay should include, regardless of the chosen title or structure.

Essential Elements of ToK Essays

• Knowledge Arguments (or Knowledge Claims): For each Area of Knowledge (AoK) considered, formulate at least one main knowledge argument or claim.
• Real World Examples: Illustrate your knowledge arguments with real-world examples, which may also include evaluation points.
• Evaluation Points: Consider alternative viewpoints to your knowledge claims. These are crucial for a balanced and critical exploration.
• Implications: Reflect on the implications of your arguments and any conclusions you reach.

These four elements are non-negotiable in any ToK Essay.

Additional Components for Enhanced Essays

• Definitions of Key Concepts: Best integrated within your knowledge arguments.
• Thesis Statement: A sentence summarizing the essay’s main argument. Typically found in the introduction, it helps organise your arguments and maintains coherence.
• Unpacking the Prescribed Title (PT) in the Introduction: Offer your interpretation and explanation of the essay question here.

For a more detailed exploration, refer to my e-book, “ How to Write the ToK Essay in 6 Easy Steps ” linked here

Common ToK Essay Structure

A widely used structure, found in about 75-80% of ToK Essays, looks like this:

This structure is effective for most Prescribed Titles and can lead to high scores.

Alternative Structure for Deeper Analysis

Some students opt for a different approach:

This structure cleverly uses the Knowledge Argument against PT in AoK 2 as evaluation points for the argument supporting PT in AoK 1. This method allows for a more in-depth comparative analysis and potentially higher scores.

Remember, the optimal structure for your ToK Essay is one that enables you to “provide a clear, coherent and critical exploration of the essay title”. For further assistance with essay structures and content, consult my e-book “How to Write the ToK Essay in 6 Easy Steps” or detailed notes for each ToK Essay this season (links in the video description).

Embarking on your ToK Essay journey with a clear understanding of its structure is key to success. Happy writing, and remember, the path to knowledge is as much about the journey as the destination!

Stay TokTastic,

Daniel, Lisbon, Dec 23

Watch the YouTube video:

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Discover more from toktoday.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading