In order to provide a detailed and well presented TOK topic, these are the things that need to be included :
- Different perspectives (dentology, utilitarian, culture, ideology, religion)
- Defenition
- Compare and contrast
- Justifications through evidence
- Pros and cons
- "To what extent"
- Detailed account of a reason or a cause
- Breaking down information
- Creating arguments
- Hypothesis and conclusion
- Create relatable knowledge questions
- Evaluate sources
- Empirical evidence
In human science, we are often subjected to problems and other issues. However in order to assess these problems, we need to look at the many aspects of human science.
These include business studies, human biology, law, media studies, industrial relations and communication studies.
For all of these human sciences, the aims are the same: to explain human behavior, formulate theories and predict it. However the problem with human sciences includes the fact that it does not focus on the conclusion of the theory, yet the process of finding this conclusion. This means in several different human science aspects, they do not base their conclusion around the results, but the analytical process of finding these results. This can result in more biased information but it offers a very analytical approach to a problem. However when comparing this to natural sciences such as biology, they often investigate to explain something specific. Whilst in human science, they investigate in order to arrive at a course of action that will change or reform an aspect of society.
Relativism - A theory that knowledge is relative to the limited nature of the mind and the conditions of knowing- a view that ethical truths depend on the individuals and groups holding them Subjectivism - It is the philosophical tenet that "our own mental activity is the only unquestionable fact of our experience". In other words,subjectivism is the doctrine that knowledge is merely subjective and that there is no external or objective truth.
Self driving cars
As todays technology is constantly advancing, the topic of self driving cars has become an important issue in the world of driving. Questions such as "if self driving cars are proven to be safer than passenger cars, should we completely ban manual driven cars?" or who will decide the decisions programed into these self driven cars?
Guess
Looking at it from a deontological point of view, one would argue that murder is completely unethical in any regards, so this means the car would be programmed into having a zero tolerance towards murder, However if a circumstance arises where a child run out in the middle of the street while the car is driving the speed limit, the child does not have the right to be on the road but the car does. So should the car crash and potentiality kill the owner, or hit the child?
Looking at it from a utilitarian point of view, one would argue that if murder was inevitable during a car crash, you would try to minimize the deathly impact. So one death is better than ten people dying.
Repressed Memory
- Tidus was accused of rape because he looked like the perpetuator. The victim started by saying he "assembled the rapist" but in court she said with certainty that he was the one.
- In previous years, many rape studies have been proven to be wrong due to misinformation caused by witnesses.
- False information can occur due to the physiatrist using exercises such as imagination, dream interpretation, hypnosis and false information.
- Tennessee study (false events that occurred during childhood, such as being saved by a lifeguard and a dog attack.
- We tell children lies because it is good for them. (santa clause)
`
One definition that supports emotions being apart of intelligence
. the ability to undertake activities that are characterized by (1) difficulty,
(2) complexity, (3) abstractness, (4) economy, (5) adaptedness to goal, (6)
social value, and (7) the emergence of originals, and to maintain such activities
under conditions that demand a concentration of energy and a resistance to
emotional forces.”
One definition that does not support emotions being apart of intelligence
“. . . a quality that is intellectual and not emotional or moral: in measuring it
we try to rule out the effects of the child’s zeal, interest, industry, and the like.
Secondly, it denotes a general capacity, a capacity that enters into everything
the child says or does or thinks; any want of ’intelligence’ will therefore be
revealed to some degree in almost all that he attempts;”
Do I consider emotions being a part of intelligence?
I personally believe that emotions are a big part of intelligence, however even though it is hard to measure, the facts are concrete which supports my opinion.
Firstly, being emotionally stable requires the ability to suppress, manipulate and control your feelings. However the ability to do so, is measured by your intelligence. Such as the Stanford Marshmallow study which was conducted to test how children control their emotional impulses.
The method of the test started by isolated a young child (4 years old) inside a room where he/she was presented with a marshmallow, however they were told if they waited for 15 minutes they would receive another marshmallow. Most of the children then proceeded to eat the marshmallow within 15 minutes due to them not being able to control their impulses (emotions). However a small portion of the children were able to wait 15 minutes.
After several years the researchers looked up those children who were able to wait 15 minutes for another marshmallow, and those children showed much higher average scores in the SAT tests.
Due to this, I believe that emotions play a large part of intelligence, as proven in the Stanford Marshmallow study.
- groupthink mentality
- we follow the crowd (can be big groups or small groups)
- it causes behavior, social norm and memes
- we do this to fit in and conform
- the Asch Experiment supports the idea of conformity (they wanted to fit in and thought the person was well informed)
What makes something an intelligence? What is the difference between an intelligence and a skill? Support your position.
The difference between intelligence and knowledge is a topic that requires vast detail into the two different subjects.
To understand the question, the definition of intelligence needs to be stated. Intelligence means the ability to acquire and apply the knowledge taught.
Skill means the ability to do something well.
Intelligence is something that is biologically established from an early age. A person might be born with a higher intellectual ability with numbers, and might lack intelligence in humanitarians subjects. However skill is something that is developed over time and through experience. So what really is the difference between intelligence and experience?
Say this, a person who plays Ice Hockey five times a week will obviously deal with many skill practices every time he steps on the ice. However if he does not understand the skill he is being taught, he won't be able to apply the technique in a real life game. Moreover, being skillful will allow you to complete these techniques very well but applying them into real life games will require intelligence. Being able to apply the knowledge into game situations will showcase the intelligence and skillfulness the player has adopted.
The same goes for any other situation. This video outlines the difference between genetics and hard work, and which one is the most essential.
When doing an IQ test, intelligence is the independent variable being tested. Intelligence is often something that measures creativity and the ability to learn something quickly. However skill is the ability to use the knowledge taught and apply it to different scenarios.
We often think of skill as being something natural, which is true to a certain extent. Talent can be contrasted to skill which means for example, some people have an eye for art. Some humans are born with an excellent skill for drawing and painting. This does not correlate to intelligence as skill can be considered natural. However learning a new sport is considered to be a combination of skill and intelligence. When you're learning to drive a car, nobody starts with a natural ability to switch gears and use the clutch properly. Being intelligent allows you to learn quicker but skills are something that everyone can learn. So the difference between intelligence and skill is rather simple. Skill is developed through experience and time, while intelligence is the ability to adapt these skills.
- Political correctness is a term that aims to not offend any specific ethnic group, culture, race or anything that is slightly considered offensive in todays society.
How offensive did I find the Mellish motor signs?
I believe the sign Mellish put up was not offensive at all. (3/10)
Of both sides of the argument, I agree with Pinker's side more. This is due to the fact that he explains the nurture and nature side. He offers concrete arguments that explains the sex differences while also considering Spelke's argument without isolating her points.
Pinker :
There are three types of positions that discuss sex differences. Extreme "nature" position: that males but not females have the talents and temperaments necessary for science.Extreme "nurture" position: that males and females are biologically indistinguishable, and all relevant sex differences are products of socialization and bias. Intermediate positions: that the difference is explainable by some combination of biological differences in average temperaments and talents interacting with socialization and bias. Liz Spelke has embraced the extreme nurture position
Liz has said that there is "not a shred of evidence" for the biological factor, that "the evidence against there being an advantage for males in intrinsic aptitude is so overwhelming that it is hard for me to see how one can make a case at this point on the other side," and that "it seems to me as conclusive as any finding I know of in science."But I don't think that in any of them I would say there is "not a shred of evidence" for the other side, even if I think that the evidence favors one side.
By proving my point, I quoted a book called Sex Differences
in Cognitive Ability by Diane Halpern, a well known psychologists -(“Socialization practices are undoubtedly important, but there is also good evidence that biological sex differences play a role in establishing and maintaining cognitive sex differences”)
So the differences between the sexes are part of the human condition. Sex is a problem in biology and sexual reproduction goes back years. I recognize that there is a theory namely Bob Trivers' theory of differential parental investment, which makes highly specific predictions about when you should expect sex differences and what they should look like. I also state that if we want to change this, we have to understand where the source of sex difference comes from. So, differences between the sexes are part of the human condition.``Casper and Lorinc:
1. “there is a crucial conceptual difference between difference and discrimination”
Therefore it is social influence, since women are discriminated at workplaces
2. Biological Similarities to support discrimination:
-General intelligence is at similar levels
-Similar Cognitions
- However there are gender differences, both have their talents men are better at throwing, whilst women are more dexterous. Men are better at mentally rotating shapes; women are better at visual memory. Men are better at mathematical solvings whilst women are better at mathematical calculations.
- (there are statistical differences in what men and women value differently) There are some things in life that the females rated higher than males, such as the ability to have a part-time career for a limited time in one's life; living close to parents and relatives; having a meaningful spiritual life; and having strong friendships
- Men prioritize having lots of money; inventing or creating something; having a full-time career; and being successful in one's line of work.
Different jobs appeal to different genders, men want to work with things, whilst woman want to work with people. (working with people might be the director of a community service organization. The occupation that fits best with “things” are chemists, mathematicians, computer programs and biologists.
3. Further on, according to studies women are biologically equal:
-Talented
-Encouraged in math and sciences
-Have equal achievements
-Satisfied
-However, due to evolutionary /Biological dispositions, “men, on average, are more likely to chase status at the expense of their families;”
For spatial ability, the advantage goes to women, but in "mental rotation,"spatial perception," and "spatial visualization" the advantage goes to men.
- However there are gender differences, both have their talents men are better at throwing, whilst women are more dexterous. Men are better at mentally rotating shapes; women are better at visual memory. Men are better at mathematical solvings whilst women are better at mathematical calculations.
- (there are statistical differences in what men and women value differently) There are some things in life that the females rated higher than males, such as the ability to have a part-time career for a limited time in one's life; living close to parents and relatives; having a meaningful spiritual life; and having strong friendships
- Men prioritize having lots of money; inventing or creating something; having a full-time career; and being successful in one's line of work.
Different jobs appeal to different genders, men want to work with things, whilst woman want to work with people. (working with people might be the director of a community service organization. The occupation that fits best with “things” are chemists, mathematicians, computer programs and biologists.
3. Further on, according to studies women are biologically equal:
-Talented
-Encouraged in math and sciences
-Have equal achievements
-Satisfied
-However, due to evolutionary /Biological dispositions, “men, on average, are more likely to chase status at the expense of their families;”
4. Biological influences could apply, through risk taking.
-Evolutionary, as Pinker states, that women are less risk takers, just due to their gender
-In a large meta-analysis involving 150 studies and 100,000 participants, in 14 out of 16 categories of risk-taking, men were overrepresented.
Idan:
-Effectiveness of aptitude tests (people in science careers are in the 90th percentile for SAT math)
-In a science paper by Novell and Hedges, it was found that in 35 out of 37 tests, the male variance for test results was higher than that of the female variance
-IQ in Scotland, females predominate in the middle, and men slightly predominate at both extremes.
-In nature vs. nurture, one is not completely responsible for male dominance in work, but we try to prove that biology is greater than zero
-levels of sex hormones, difference in brain size and shapes
-in all cultures, greater involvement of women in child care, and men in competitiveness
-To analyze Personality, a cross-national survey was conducted which had consistent results across the different age groups for personality difference in genders.
- Diane Halpern analyzed results for cognitive tests across ten nations and concluded that the majority of the results showed cross cultural consistency between genders
-Despite feminist movements, very little change in personal life interests were seen for both genders
-sex differences seen in other mammals (among baby vervet monkeys, males prefer to play with trucks and females with other toys)
-sex differences in early childhood, (newborn baby boys prefer looking at an object, while newborn baby girls at a face)
-Boys grown up as girls from an early age, showed 'boyish' behaviour
-No difference between way boys and girls are treated by parents and treated
-prenatal sex hormones affect people's behaviour, girls with male hormones prenatally had 'boyish' traits
with X chromosomes, people who have only x chromosomes showed that if the x chromosome came from the mom, they acted more like girls, and if they got it from the father, then they were less social and more technical.
Is gender differences caused by a cultural aspect or biological?
In the video, Harold was trying to find out the different reasons to why there is a gender difference in terms of professions.
He looked at the biological aspect as well as the cultural reasonings. Through his findings, he talked with many different researchers who all had a subjective opinion.
One of the main researchers stated that society shapes the gender differences and often leads males and females into different paths, such as introducing barbies to females at early age, whilst the males are left with mechanical toys. This shapes their profession in the future and often leads to women working in hospitals and etc, while males are engineers or mechanics.
However a popular opinion by one of the researchers stated that gender differences is caused from an early age, proving to be biological. The researchers conducted a study which tested the preference of male and female toys to babies. The new born babies clearly showed a preference depending on their gender, as males went for the mechanical toys whilst the females directed themselves towards the "princess" toys.
This theory proves that gender differences is caused by a biological extent however it is also mixed with cultural.
Another theory states that gender differences is caused by a mix of the two, saying that society will push genders towards their respective professions.
Personally, I believe that gender differences originates from a biological perspective. The proof is rather substantial and most of the researchers studying the cultural aspect cannot explain the results found in the experiments.
Further Knowledge questions :
- To what extent might these vary according to age, education or cultural background?
- To what extent might this distinction between private knowledge and public knowledge be
When we say the word “learning”, we usually mean “to think using the brain”. This basic concept of learning is the main viewpoint in the Cognitive Learning Theory (CLT). The theory has been used to explain mental processes as they are influenced by both intrinsic and extrinsic factors, which eventually bring about learning in an individual. Cognitive Learning Theory implies that the different processes concerning learning can be explained by analyzing the mental processes first. It posits that with effective cognitive processes, learning is easier and new information can be stored in the memory for a long time. On the other hand, ineffective cognitive processes result to learning difficulties that can be seen anytime during the lifetime of an individual.
Cognitive science is the study of memory and the process of the brain. Often people tend to study in an environment that has no distraction such as at your desk in your room... however science has proven that variation is good for remember certain things. A study was conducted which took 2 groups in a similar environment and they were given the chance to study a memory test, whilst the other group studied at a different environment which they had not done before. The study showed how the group in a different environment had a remembered 24 words of the test whilst the other group only remembered 16. Self practice is also vital as you should test yourselves consistently when reading over texts or trying to remember something. When remembering certain things, the brains seems to get overwhelmed as we try to cram everything at once. However science shows that we should take breaks which can help the process of remembering. So instead of studying math for 2 hours in one day, study for 1 hour then another hour the next day.
Further Knowledge questions :
Are the following types of justification all equally reliable: intuition, sense perception, evidence,
reasoning, memory, authority, group consensus, and divine revelation?
When can we claim to know something? - When we are able to discuss the specific topic in detail and be able to think critically as well answer questions related to the topic. It includes being able to accumulate your justifications with the proper belief of the topic, proven to be true. However believing is considered to be a psychological/mental state, which doesn't guarantee the truth. What are the proper reasons? - Being able to pass the knowledge on to other people A Verbs of knowledge : - Vet - Känner - Hved - Kender - Weisen - Know - What you know is true - That you believe it (psychological/mental state - however doesn't guarantee the truth ) - That you have the proper justifications to accumulate One simple, and useful, framework for distinguishing knowledge from belief is the following: (1) A belief is an opinion in the absence of supporting empirical evidence; it’s a matter of faith, not reason (it can’t be proved or disproved). (2) Knowledge is an opinion also—a working hypothesis—but it’s one for which substantial, public (or potentially public), cogent, empirical evidence exists to support it; that is, knowledge is a conclusion warranted by a preponderance of evidence and experience. (3) Knowledge in the sense of infallible apprehension or grasp of reality—what is ontologically “true”—is probably not possible. Instead, knowledge seems always to be contingent: new evidence as it becomes available may further support it or may disprove it. Further knowledge questions : - How and why is knowledge renewed or reshaped? - How do we acquire and search for knowledge? - How do we produce knowledge?
