2014-2015 TOK Topics

2014-2015 TOK Titles
1. There is no such thing as a neutral question. Evaluate this statement with

reference to two areas of knowledge.
2. There are only two ways in which humankind can produce knowledge:
through passive observation or through active experiment. To what extent
do you agree with this statement?
3. There is no reason why we cannot link facts and theories across
disciplines and create a common groundwork of explanation. To what extent
do you agree with this statement?
4. With reference to two areas of knowledge discuss the way in which shared
knowledge can shape personal knowledge
5. Ways of knowing are a check on our instinctive judgments. To what
extent do you agree with this statement?
6. The whole point of knowledge is to produce both meaning and purpose in
our personal lives. To what extent do you agree with this statement?
Thoughts on the May 2015 TOK prescribed essay titles

The following thoughts on the May 2015 TOK prescribed titles are provided as suggestions only of
how you approach the prescribed titles. The nature of TOK means that there are many ways of
interpreting a question; the important thing is that you identify and explore your own knowledge questions,
and support your discussion with real life situations that you have taken from your experiences as a
learner, and examples that you have read about. In the interests of academic honesty, you should not
reproduce any of the text you see below.
The theoryofknowledge.net Facebook page provides daily links to real life situations, some of which may
be relevant for your essay. Our free newsletter rounds up the best of these, which you can subscribe to
by following the links on the site. We also produce a premium newsletter, which goes into much more
depth on the implications and different perspectives of these RLSs. You can sign up for this in the
resources shop of the site, or the Facebook page.
1. There is no such thing as a neutral question. Evaluate this statement with

reference to two areas of knowledge.
a. What are the key words & terms that need pinning down?
The command term in the prescribed title is neutral question. A quick look in any dictionary will give you
a workable definition of this word its essential meaning is unbiased, non-partisan, or something that
does not take sides.
In other words, the prescribed title is suggesting that questions within the different areas of knowledge
lead us in a certain direction, and have some sort of agenda. These are known as leading questions, and
are well known in the legal world, where witnesses are often asked questions designed to produce a
particular answer that confirms what the questioner wants to prove. Gathering knowledge in this way can
also be termed confirmation bias.
The essay is therefore suggesting, that all questions are leading questions, and that it isnt possible to ask
or investigate knowledge without having a preconceived notion of what you want to find.
b. What are the difficulties and challenges of the question?
Although it may seem at first sight that this is a prescribed title that is easy to refute, the more you explore
the different areas of knowledge, the more you find that it is very difficult to escape the kind of biases that
produce leading questions. So one difficulty might be that its hard to counter the claim within the
prescribed title.
You could argue that the search for knowledge is in itself an agenda: as soon as you ask a question, you
cease to be looking for knowledge in a neutral way. If you subscribe to this view, then it would be virtually
impossible to counter the claim in the prescribed title.
c. What knowledge issues & associated WOKs/AOKs could be explored?
d. What sort of real life situations could be drawn on?
e. Which perspectives and implications could be considered?
For thoughts and ideas on these aspects of the essay, consult our TOK Essay Guide for May 2015.
2. There are only two ways in which humankind can produce knowledge: through
passive observation or through active experiment. To what extent do you agree
with this statement?
The terms that need special attention in order to set up your essay are passive observation and active
experimentation. The first suggests that the knower makes no impact on the phenomenon he or she is
studying. This might be related to knowledge that has to be accessed through discovery, but which exists
in its own right. The second suggests that the knower is able to manipulate, and perhaps even help to
determine, the outcome of what they are studying. This could be more related to knowledge that needs to
be created in some way.
But the question is not dealing solely with these two forms of producing knowledge, and asking which is
the more effective form of knowledge generation an easy mistake to make. It is asking whether there are
other ways in which we can produce knowledge.
The essay provides no indication of how many areas of knowledge or ways of knowing should be focused
on, which means that it will be very easy to produce an essay that is broad and very shallow. It also
requires those answering it to produce the right balance between the areas of knowledge, and ways of
knowing the focus of the title is on the first, but it will be necessary to utilize the latter to provide context.
Its also potentially more difficult to anchor prescribed titles that are more based on ways of knowing to
solid real life experiences, so you must make sure that your examples relate to areas of knowledge, rather
than more vaguely-defined experiences and examples.
3. There is no reason why we cannot link facts and theories across disciplines and
create a common groundwork of explanation. To what extent do you agree with
this statement?
It would be easy to mistake the command terms of this prescribed title, and assess how facts and
theories can (or cannot) be linked. However, the wording of the question suggests that facts and
theories should be considered together (their combined meaning equating to evidence), with your essay
focusing on across disciplines and common groundwork of explanation. The first of these implies the
different areas of knowledge, and the second means the principles and rules behind them.
We can therefore distil the essential meaning of this prescribed title to: Can evidence from one area of
knowledge be used to understand the principles of another?, or, even more pithily, Do areas of
knowledge overlap?
In common with others from the exam session, this prescribed title does not define any clear parameters
for the essay. Examining the extent to which areas of knowledge (and ways of knowing) overlap could
take a lifetime and more to assess, so you should have several focus points in mind before you start.
Essays answering this question may also end up example-driven (partly because of above), with
knowledge question discussion fitted in around real life situations, rather than real life situations used to
support the discussion. Be clear about the relationship that should exist between your ideas and the way
you should justify them if you are going to take on this title.
4. With reference to two areas of knowledge discuss the way in which shared
knowledge can shape personal knowledge.
This prescribed title focuses on the two main knowledge categories of shared and personal knowledge,
about which the IB is quite helpful in the subject guide to TOK (get your teacher to show you pages 16-19
this should be considered essential reading for this question!).
The IB identifies two types of shared knowledge: first, the areas of knowledge themselves, produced by
collaboration between many people, and subject to change over time; second, the different groups
(national, ethnic, gender, age, etc.) to which we belong.

Personal knowledge, in contrast, is gained by our own experiences, education, backgrounds, and so on.
The big difference between the two is that personal knowledge is harder to share, and because it is
possessed by us alone, does not rely so heavily on linguistic forms of description.
Although this does specify two areas of knowledge, shared knowledge and personal knowledge means
essentially all knowledge, so again, the boundaries of this essay are wide-ranging. In addition, what it
wants you to do with that knowledge (shape) can mean many different things. So whilst there is
undoubted potential to run with this question and do something quite creative, there is also the danger
that your essay will end up being very unfocused, and lacking in both depth and detail.
The wording of the title mean that you write a fairly descriptive essay, talking about how you personally
have been influenced by different areas of knowledge, and you should be careful not to fall into this trap.
Connected to this, it may be hard to identify and develop clear counterclaims, given that its fairly clear that
shared knowledge does play a huge role in shaping our personal knowledge.
Lastly, TOK essays need a good balance of real life examples, so just drawing on your own experiences
and personal knowledge wont take you as far as you need to go to properly answer the question.
Useful examples: Question 4 With reference to two areas of

knowledge discuss the way in which shared knowledge can
shape personal knowledge.
Posted on September 11, 2014by tokhelper
Ill try to post examples from different Areas of Knowledge. One of the most stand
outKnowledge Issues here is how belonging to a cultural/social group can provide us
with a certain perspective that narrows our approach to knowledge. The classic general
example would be with a patient that has a problem with their leg. The surgeon would
want to operate, the pharmacist would want to medicate, the physiotherapist would
want to exercise the musco-skeletal system, the priest would pray and so on and so on.
Each person takes an approach based on their background and the shared knowledge
held by their profession.
Make sure that you read the TOK guide for 2015, you can easily search for it on the
internet or ask your teacher for a copy. There is a very detailed section on personal
knowledge vs shared knowledge that must be read.
History
1, Aboriginal/Minority History
The history of many countries tends to ignore that of their aboriginal groups or
minorities. Its not difficult to find an Americans view of their history is shaped by the
pilgrims fathers and onwards. Similar examples can be found for Canada, Australia,
New Zealand in the English speaking world. These histories become forgotten, or used
for a different purpose.
Heres one example about Native American History and enslavement, although it might
be somewhat academic for a number of Diploma
students: http://www.academia.edu/323423/Written_Out_of_History_Contemporary
_Native_American_Narratives_of_Enslavement
2, Posh white men, history in the UK
On a similar vein of thought much of history is about old white men. See the Telegraph
for details about changes to the UK History
curriculum: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/9790633/Will-Govesposh-white-blokes-history-curriculum-ignore-women.html
3, The forgotten role of women
A great article by Naomi Wolf on the role of women in
History. http://www.nytimes.com/library/magazine/millennium/m2/wolf.html
4, Enigma and the Historian that won WWII
(Note this example requires a little bit of work to make it fit the title)
Being a historian this is obviously one of my favourite examples for knowledge
Issues in TOK. During the attempts to break the German secret codes, known as
Enigma, the top mathematicians such as Alan Turing found themselves at a complete
loss what to do once the German Navy realised that their code books had been stolen
from U-110 in May 1941. With their stolen code books know useless and an impass on
how to crack the codes mathematically the Head code breaker at Bletchley Park Alastair
Denniston turned to the top talents at Cambridge and was recommended the History
graduate Harry Hinsley. Hinsley took one look at the code and realised that a
mathematical solution was highly improbable. Almost immediately he analysed and
framed the problem from his perspective as a Historian, looking at the causes and
consequences related to the Germans use of the Enigma. It is there that he realised that
rather than risk once more an attack on a heavily armed German U-boat or military
vessel, the British Navy could quite easily capture German fishing trawlers sailing under
Norwegian flags. These ships were using exactly the same enigma machines as the
German Navy to relay information concerning the weather in the North Sea. In this way
by June 1941, Turing and the other mathematicians received all the necessary
information they needed to continue to crack the enigma codes during the most critical
point of the war when it was feared that Britain would not be able to continue to wage
war without the knowledge of German naval movements. Thus a mathematician tried to
resolve the problem using maths, however it took an historian to look at the problem to
win the War! Hurrah!
To get the full story in a much more interesting manner buy Simon Sebag Montefiores
Enigma at your favourite bookshop or equally go to amzon
here: http://www.amazon.com/Enigma-Battle-Code-Hugh-SebagMontefiore/dp/0470581085
You can also look at Harry Hinsleys wikipedia page
here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harry_Hinsley
Ill try to find a link to Simon writing or talking about Harry as soon as possible.
5, Natural Sciences
In science the shared knowledge of the Areas of Knowledge can strongly affect personal
knowledge. Many studennts often use Galileo as an example in their TOK essays to
represent how shared knowledge (represented by the Catholic Church) at the time tried
to squash the personal knowledge of an individual (Galileo). Other examples than this
could well be explored. William Beatty has put together a great list of examples here for
you:http://amasci.com/weird/vindac.html
The IB ToK Guide (first assessment 2015) has a fairly detailed section broadly outlining
definitions of shared knowledge and personal knowledge, this section is
labelledKnowledge in ToK. It is strongly recommended that students refer to this
section.
How you define shared and personal knowledge will, obviously, greatly influence how
you respond to the question. I am broadly defining both terms through the area of
Human Sciences, as such I define shared knowledge as a socio-cultural knowledge,
broadly along the lines of a set of norms, values, signifiers and cultural mores. I am
defining individual knowledge as knowledge acquired through individualised experience
and perspective (such as memories, perceptions, emotions etc). These are neither the
correct, nor only definitions of these terms
There needs to be a focus on defining shared and personal knowledge. Beyond merely
definitions these terms will need to be explored, and in exploring them students will
undoubtedly start to consider different types of knowledge (e.g. personal knowledge,
group knowledge, privileged knowledge etc).
The command term is to Discuss therefore looking at the knowledge issues in a
number of different ways.
The Knowledge Questions arising from this PT will very much depend on how the terms
shared and personal knowledge are defined. Such knowledge questions arising from
the definitions that I have outlined could be:
1) Can we use the scientific method to establish the direction of causation in
development of shared and personal knowledge ?
2) Can we group ways of knowing in order to establish a shared knowledge which
supersedes individually perceived experience ?
3) If we accept an external shared knowledge exists are we also accepting an external
objective reality ?
4) How do we situate the breakthrough moments of innovators within a shared
knowledge system ?
5) Can we establish whether paradigm shifts are more likely in a loose shared
knowledge system ?
The range of KQs is near endless, these are just examples designed as starters for
student thinking.
As in most questions the Areas of Knowledge that you choose to reference will have a
significant influence on the content and direction of your essay. If I were to be writing
this essay I would choose Human Sciences and The Arts as my AoKs for reference.
This is not because these are the best Areas of Knowledge to use, its just that theyre
the most interesting areas for me personally in relation to this question. You may choose
to use very different AoKs and come up with a far better answer than me.
Rather than write a section on Human Sciences and section on the Arts separately I
prefer to take themes from the KI (how shared knowledge shapes personal knowledge)
and exemplify each theme through the AoKs.
Themes.
How shared Knowledge forms personal knowledge.

Socialisation / Culturization.
The most obvious ways in which shared knowledge forms personal knowledge in the
human sciences are through processes of primary and secondary socialisation and
culturization. Evidence for Primary & Secondary Socialisation could be drawn from a
wide range of research including Banduras Bobo Doll research, Vygotskys Theory of
Social Development, Maccobys theory of sex role development or Bems research into
Gender Development. This is really only the tip of the ice-berg of research in this area.
Conformity.
Another area in which Human Sciences have shown empirically that shared knowledge
shapes personal knowledge is through the social psychological study of Conformity.
Almost any research from this area will demonstrate the link, a starting point might be
the classics: Zimbardos Stanford Prison, Aschs Lines Research, Crutchfield .
Another area of interest here might be the research into the Psychology of Obedience:
research such as Milgrams Obedience research or Hoflings study of nurses. This
research shows that social norms influence personal knowledge & therefore individual
behaviour. However, it could be argued (as counterpoint) that the individualised
knowledge of difference (maybe embarrassment etc) is changing behaviour, which then
effects the whole group / shared knowledge.
Artistic Movements.
A good place to start explaining how shared knowledge influences personal knowledge
with references to The Arts is in the growth and spread of Artistic Movements. Students
could explore how socio-cultural changes at a particular place & time fed through to
changes in the artistic world (e.g. The Renaissance) this then fed through to a change in
which individuals saw / understood their world, ie shared knowledge shaping personal
knowledge.
Cultural Memes
Another example from The Arts may be the germination and spread of cultural memes
(including internet memes) interesting article here. It could be argued that the quick
spread of a meme demonstrates the influence of the shared knowledge system over the
individual knowledge system. However, in counterarguments students may want to
consider the direction of causation: it could be argued that it was individual knowledge
which led to the creation of the original meme.
Ambitious ToK students could discuss Roland Barthes book S/Z which looks at the
codes of meaning in Balzacs book Sarrasine. Barthes looks at how the different
processes of encoding are either individually or collectively produced and consumed.
The book is a good exploration of the bi-directional nature of shared and individualised
knowledge. A critique of S/Z
Personal Knowledge is dominant over shared knowledge.

We could look to apparently innate behaviours to argue against the question, this
argument would be based on the premise that inherited behaviours are fairly fixed, and
free of social influence. Clear examples of this is seen in the genetic influences of
attraction. This could be cited using Wedekinds Sweaty T Shirt research (from the
Human Sciences AoK).
Sweaty T-Shirt Research
This research was developed from the evolutionary psychology perspective on
attraction, the research details are here, essentially Wedekinds research shows that
women are most attracted to men whose major histocompatibility complex were the
opposite of their own. Similarly Martha McClintock at the Uni of Chicago has
demonstrated that women are more attracted to men who smell like their father. These
research findings could be used as evidence for an innate personal knowledge, which
is to a greater degree unaffected by shared (social/collective) knowledge. As such this
evidence is arguing counterpoint to the question. Other findings from evolutionary
psychology could also be used (e.g. neurological motivation & reward systems in use of
social media, or satiety systems in formation of eating disorders etc).
In terms of The Arts it could be argued that moments of deep innovation become genre
breaking (or mould smashing). These moments are the product of an individuals
autonomous creativity, fairly independent of their social environment. Such people may
be described as having a creative personality. Students could consider the birth of
significant artistic movements (such as surrealism), or the career of those deemed to be
eccentric idiosyncratic artists, arguing that their contribution was to the shared
knowledge, rather than taken from the shared knowledge.
Shared and personal knowledge are inseparable, and possibly the

same thing.
It could be argued that the relationship between shared and personal knowledge is bidirectional, with each sphere shaping the other. There are a plethora of examples which
could be drawn from both Human Sciences and The Arts. I will focus on a few of my
favourites here. I am sure that you can find your own, more pertinent examples.
Human Sciences.
Jungs Archetypes & collective subconscious

Carl Jung argued that we share a set of common psychological meanings, he called
these Archetypes, which are models of how we understand phenomenon (for example
there are archetypes for mother, persona, the self, father, child etc). So, the archetypes
are a shared public knowledge which exist in the personal knowledge sphere.
The Archetypes are said to exist within the Collective Unconscious, this is the
unconscious that all members of a particular species share, it is the aggregate set of
memories of that species. Again, this is a shared public knowledge which is experienced
at a personal level.
Bio-Psych Neuroplasticity.
Neuroplasticity is a term used to describe the influence of the external environment
upon the physical neurological structure of the brain, including both synaptic changes
and neural pathways. The process shows that external (shared) knowledge can change
internal individualised experience (which could be a definition of personal knowledge),
and the opposite direction of causality is also demonstrated. There are numerous
research studies which can be used to show this relationship, I would suggest that this
is a good article in which to find the classic evidence.
Interpretation of art.
From The Arts students could look at the interpretation of art in order to show a
bidirectional relationship between shared knowledge and personal knowledge. This
discussion might look at the relationship between the viewer / subject and the the
object. This process involved the bringing of social/shared knowledge to the
interpretation, and the individualised nature of interpretation / experience. There are
numerous texts & essays on this relationship, however I would recommend John Berger
Ways of Seeing as a starting point.
I think that there is wide scope throughout this question for discussing the effects of
digital technology, particularly as applied to social media. Each section could be written
with reference to technology & social media this could also be linked to Human
Sciences & The Arts (or to any other AoK as needed). Some possible reading on this
may be texts by Marc Prensky on different use of the internet for work, leisure and
education.
As I explained at the beginning, this is just my interpretation of the question, and my
suggestions as to what could be included. Use this as an example of how the question
could be answered a suggestion for what an essay may look like, rather than as a
structure for an actual essay. I would suggest that you develop your own interpretation
and suggestions for content, youll find it much easier to write to your own ideas.
Please feel free to share comments and thoughts in the comments box below.
Remember sharing is caring, and lack of communication is unhealthy.
5. Ways of knowing are a check on our instinctive judgments. To what extent do

you agree with this statement?
Although none of the prescribed titles this session have an area of knowledge or way of knowledge
specified for consideration, this one comes very close. Given that the Oxford Dictionary defines intuition
as The ability to understand something instinctively, without the need for conscious reasoning, its fairly
clear that instinctive judgements equates to intuition.
In terms of what the question wants you to do with this, the word check is the command term, meaning
verify, regulate, or control. So the question is asking you to look at the extent to which the knowledge
produced by this way of knowing is affected by the others.
Theres a lot to do with this prescribed title. Not only do you need to assess how at least three ways of
knowing interact, you also need to consider more than one area of knowledge to show that this interaction
may vary according to the context of the knowledge. So although this is in some ways the most specific of
all the questions, it is still potentially a wide-ranging essay.
Writing essay primarily on ways of knowing often leads to vague knowledge questions, and non-specific
real life situations. So you need to make sure that you also provide plenty of reference to areas of
knowledge in order to ensure your essay is sufficiently TOK-like.
6. The whole point of knowledge is to produce both meaning and purpose in our
personal lives. To what extent do you agree with this statement?
There are quite a few command terms to contend with in this prescribed title. First of all, its interesting
that the title really emphasises whole point; this leaves you in no doubt that there is (according to the
quote) no other reason for the acquisition of knowledge than the one suggested, not just the most
important point.
Second, you need to pin down both meaning and purpose, two words that mean different things.
Meaning suggests something worthwhile, enriching, and fulfilling; purpose suggests a path or calling that
you should follow.
Finally, the title uses the term personal lives, which implies that you should not be investigating
professional or career-related achievement.
The potential scope of this essay is huge. Assessing what constitutes meaning and purpose will be very
challenging indeed in a 1600-word essay. There are also issues with the wording of the title. First, you
cant really agree or disagree to a certain extent about the whole point of something either you agree,
or you disagree. This might cause a little confusion, but perhaps shouldnt be dwelt on. Second, the use of
the word personal is interesting, and could also lead to problems. Were used to dealing with the areas of
knowledge in terms of the experts and professionals associated with them, so when we talk about
knowledge in the natural sciences, were usually concerned with scientists; when we talk about knowledge
in the arts, were usually concerned with artists, and so on.
This question prompts you to consider your personal life, and how knowledge from the different AOKs
adds meaning and purpose to it. This may tempt you to approach this as a first order knowledge question
in other words, explain how historical knowledge or scientific knowledge provides you with meaning and
purpose (for history, perhaps you might consider saying that learning about the past helps you avoid
making mistakes in the future; and how in science, medicine has helped cure you of a particular ailment).
But in TOK, were more interested in second order knowledge questions in other words, how we acquire
and process knowledge related to the AOKs. This is definitely harder to link to the idea of meaning and
purpose in our personal lives.
For thoughts and ideas on these aspects of the essay, consult our TOK Essay Guide for May 2015

2014-2015 TOK Topics

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2014-2015 TOK Topics

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

2014-2015 TOK Titles

1. There is no such thing as a neutral question. Evaluate this statement with

Thoughts on the May 2015 TOK prescribed essay titles

1. There is no such thing as a neutral question. Evaluate this statement with

(national, ethnic, gender, age, etc.) to which we belong.

Useful examples: Question 4 With reference to two areas of

How shared Knowledge forms personal knowledge.

Personal Knowledge is dominant over shared knowledge.

Shared and personal knowledge are inseparable, and possibly the

Jungs Archetypes & collective subconscious

5. Ways of knowing are a check on our instinctive judgments. To what extent do

You might also like