Linking the different Areas of Knowledge (AOK) with different Ways of Knowing (WOK) can be quite challenging at times. I now attempted to link History with Language, Logics, Emotion and Sense Perception.

History and Language:

• Does the way (the language) that certain historical events are presented in history books influence the way that the reader understands these events?
• What role does loaded language play when talking about historical events?
• What role do connotation and denotation play when talking about historical events?
• How can language introduce bias into historical accounts?
• How does language help or hinder the interpretation of historical facts?

Continue reading »

So, you are now sitting in front of your computer reading this very post about the Ways of Knowing. How do you know that? Honestly! How do you know that you are reading this text right now? Is it because someone told you? Of course not. You know it because your senses tell you so. You can read the text with your eyes (vision), you hear the sound of the computer fan humming (hearing), and you feel that you are sitting on a chair (touch).

Philosophers have identified these four ways of knowing: Sense Perception, Language, Emotion/intuition and Logics/Reason. Pick one fact that you know and ask yourself what the sources of this piece of knowledge are. From where do you know it? You will soon discover that it is possible to trace you knowledge back to one of these four Ways of Knowing. Let’s start with a little example: “I know that atoms exist”. How do you know it? Have you ever seen, heard or felt atoms before? I can hardly imagine. Sense perception is therefore an unlikely source. Do you intuitively and emotionally feel their existence? Hopefully not! The most likely source of this knowledge is that someone told, most probably a teacher, you or that you read about them. The source of this knowledge is therefore language. Continue reading »

When I was younger, in my teens, I started to discover my love for the sciences. I was fascinated by Biology and Physics and I think I must have driven my teachers crazy with my constant request for “proofs” and evidence. I liked science so much that I even included chemical formulas in my literature essays. Instead of saying “The water waves are gently moving in the sunset.” I’d write “Waves made of H2O are gently moving in the solar spectrum.” My English teacher then responded, “Don’t forget about the H2SO4 (sulfuric acid) which is dissolved as well!”. An then I didn’t feel as bad about the bad mark on the test anymore… Now I am teacher myself and occasionally I meet some students who remind me very much of myself. They are constantly confronting me with the words “How do you know that?” – always eager for empirical, scientific evidence. They want to see things before they believe it. They want formulas. They want cause and effect relationships. Without having been aware of it, I myself as well as my students, were followers of a certain philosophical school. We were “Positivists”. Continue reading »

 

If I say: “I always lie” – am I then lying, or not? If the sentence “I always lie” is true, then it should not be true, because I always lie. If the sentence is not true, this would translate into “I never lie”, But in this case I lied to you, and we again have a contradiction. This is an example of a paradox. A paradox is a statement which contradicts itself. In this episode I’d like to show you a few other examples of paradoxes. Just for the fun of it.

Once there was a crocodile, which stole a child. The mother talked to the crocodile and the crocodile said that it will return the child to the mother if she answers to a question correctly. If the answer is wrong, then the crocodile would eat the child. The mother agreed. The crocodile now asked the question: “What am I going to do next?”. What should the mother answer? If she says: “You are not going to eat my child.”, then the crocodile would respond: “Wrong answer, I would have eaten the child, and now I’m really going to eat it because your answer was wrong”. What’s going to happen if the mother answered: “You are going to eat my child.”. The question is now: Should the crocodile now eat the child or not? If the answer is correct, then the crocodile promised to return the child. But this would make the answer wrong again. If the crocodile really intended to eat the child, he has to return it, but at the same time can’t do that because then the answer would be wrong again. Continue reading »

The MU Puzzle is an example of a formal system. The objective of the MU Puzzle is to try to reach the string MU starting from MI, using only these four rules:

• Rule 1: xI ? xIU. If there is an I at the end of the string of letters, then you can add a U. For example if your string is MI then you can change it into MIU. You can only add a U if the last letter is an I.
• Rule 2: Mx ? Mxx. You can double any string that follows the M. So if your string is MIU then you can double the IU after the M. You will then get MIUIU. We have doubled the IU.

Continue reading »

 

In this edition of TOK-Talk I will explain you what a thought experiment is. Is it always necessary to conduct real-life experimets to reach a valid scientific conclusion? Listen to find out!
Continue reading »

 

In this edition of TOK-Talk I would like to explore the difference between a good and a bad explanation. Why are simpler explanations usually the better ones? Listen to find out! Continue reading »