Mathematics, intro session

This week we began to explore mathematics as an Area of Knowledge (AOK) and the presentation used can be found on Edline. It was interesting watching and listening to your definitions of mathematics and the certainty with which the truths of mathematics are held. Notably the reaction generated when it was demonstrated that NOT all angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees. This demo and the problem with finding a flat plane to create real parallel lines should have secured for you the importance of using Axioms in Mathematics. Interesting that we need assumptions before we can do the sums!?!

The Thursday group featured a really good presentation by Kuba based on decision making. We then fell into one of those discussion rabbit holes for over 30 minutes contemplating how to make winning decisions in Chess based on more than just pure logic. Dias and I now need to play chess to settle our difference of views! If he plays like a robot I will let you know with my easy victory. mMaybe though I am making an emotional statement there or maybe I planned such an opening statement? - the mind games begin... Well done Kuba.

So Friday we did our maths in the park and not in the dark. Groups reported back on the defining language for mathematics:
Axioms
Theorum
Conjecture
Theorum

With Dashaably helping the randomly selected speakers we ended up with the following explanations:

Axiom: (Paula) We need a starting point., basic assumptions for our theorums. By creating assumptions such as Euclids original 5 we can create a hypothesis based upon our observations (sounds like Science's methodology ). Axioms are independent assumptions and give us that starting point.

Theorum: (Boris) Using Axioms and deductive reasoning we can design a proof proposal (a theoretical conclusion - Karl)

Conjecture: (Sergei)When you are not completely sure - right or wrong - a hypothesis that feels to work but so far is not shown to be true.

Proof: (Celine) Theorum shown to be made of relevant axioms. The process of proving is within the proof.

Feel free to add to these and question the language, otherwise a good attempt by tyhe Friday group to clarify.

History

Finally we had the second run of the History sessions with Chris this week. This means we are (both classes) back in synch and I can blog again! Once again many thanks are due to Chris and also to those of you in the Tursday group who made very perceptive comments, contributions and also importantly raised good questions. i would like to summarize a few of the things Chris' presentations raised. History as you know is an important Area of Knowledge (AOK) in TOK and these ideas will give some of you scope for answering one of the TOK set essays using History and its aims and methodologies.
History and everyday life
Can you ever know the past?

"We are creatures that rely on experience more than instinct". Do you agree with Chris' view in this regard?

History provides us with a shared fabric of society. Is this important?

Historical materialism

Who could have predicted the current levels of global interdependence during the cold war?

Why do people crave personal histories, why do so many people search and research family trees and additionally witness national histories being celebrated. History has a certain materialism to it - however:

Leopold van Ranke gives us the Rankian view that a historians (one who writes history) job is purely to show "what happened".

Marxism provides a contrasting view - all past events are explainable and all futures are predictable.

History and progress

Have we progressed? History is often reported as a march forwards - a march to progress. If so why are we slaughtering ourselves in continued wars in ever more sophisticated ways?

History and cause and effect

WW2 seemingly was a response to the failures of settlement of WW1

Regarding the history of thought, we have shown that paradigm shifts in thought occur every so often and so if history tells us anything it is that most things we know hold as true will turn out to be false. This is a big idea in TOK. What can we know from history if this is the case?



So to summarize History:

Do we study it because we have to? People just want pegs back in time - could we live in a world where a sense of history did not exist?

Is History a Science? Yes in the sense their are methods to follow. No in the sense Science employs facts. History cant say anything is a fact other than dates of events, people who existed BUT peoples motivations are subject to the retrospective reporting of biased historians

In History it may be more difficult "to know" than in say Science. Consider how the cold war is recorded in USA, Russian and British history books. Howwver in both History and Science (due to falsification) you can never achieve the goal of knowing for certain the truths you are searching for.

Other issues with history may include: A time limit - who cares after say 50 years? Governments often only release official documents after 50 years - by which time the truth of events and those affected have or are passng into memory.

The Societal perceptions of history - are there conformity pressures to celebrate historical accounts. e.g celebrating the dambusters is a part of the British culture, D Day etc. No accounts of the numbers of germans dying is wrapped in the history, the Dresden Bombings are not discussed. Why? The British invented the concept of concentration camps in the Boer war - how well know and studied is this by British School children?

History as an AOK raises many good TOK ideas for discussion. The above should support your own notes. Please reflect upon Chris' class on your own blogs.

Reason, Logical fallacies

Key words to remember:

Assumptions- making personal judgements containing guesses and biases, can be accurate but lead to errors being made

Fallacy - a mis calculation in thinking, an error in the making..

The incident in the store exercise we looked at was demonstrating that when it comes to recalling incidents, with our memories we tend to tell a story. This is problematic in Law courts and for us in TOK it highlights one issue with Reason as a source of knowing. Different storytellers see different things in the same incident, so who to believe? This is the narrative fallacy. This is a problem in History/ historical record.

The list of argument or inductive fallacies is lomg, I like this clip here. It aims to demonstrae some key fallacy terms using the debate as to whether God exists. Always a good TOK topic!



Can you give your own examples of Straw man, Red herring and circular reasoning? Slippery slope or ad hominem arguments? Any other?


As we looked at sample essays this week you should attempt to craft the opening sentence for one of the TOK essays, then build up the first paragraph. Plan the rest. This is the process we will follow so get on with this when you havve the confidence to begin. We are only two terms in but I believe a number of you can attempt this now.

Grey Swans and Paradigm shifts

I have posted on edline an article from New Scientist (one of the best respectable resources for TOK ideas). It is from May 2008 and the title of the article is "Some swans are Grey". Incredibly (perhaps?) I found the article in a chance glance at the front cover of the journal as I returned the projector to Bryans room today, straight from TOK. Serendipity!! Well, true serendipity required some action.
We talked Thurs and today about the current paradigm of thought being science based and science more than any disipline is defined by its methodology. I mentioned tipping points in both classes and speculated where the new shift of ideas might come from. Well the article in new scientist claims that "Poppers definition of science is being sorely tested by the emergence of scientific ideas which seem to fail it" "it " being, of course, falsification. The article then goes on to cite Colin Howson of LSE in London promoting "an alternative view of science based not on simplistic true/false logic, but on the far more subtle concept of degrees of belief" Essentially a mix of mathematical probability and the" subjective concept of belief". If you want to research this its called the Bayensian view of science, after Thomas Bayes the mathematician (18th c). Its pretty interesting and gives us now 4 views about how science methodologies exist. I hope you can remember the other 3?

Reasoning creates knowledge issues - I believe there were plenty of debatable syllogisms in class, the powerpoint is on edline if you wish to check out the premises/ argument/ conclusions presented again. As always thank you for the engaging, intelligent contributions. Special note to Kuba for introducing a new "freedom of thinking" model - Check it on his blog!

Please remember syllogisms are arguments set up to show deductive reasoning but demonstrate issues/problems that illustrate the occurence of inductive fallacies. Therefore exposing the two types of logic we examined this week.

Recommendations

Check out the wave on Siljes blog. If you doubt what these two clips show then have a quick gander (look ) at the "Stanford Prison experiment" Or check it out anyhow - the power of role play is incredible. Ta ra ra Boom dee ay!!

Also once you watch "the wave" have a look at my post "brown eyes, blue eyes" it also demonstrates role play power - this time a teacher demonstrating how children can become racist.

I am beginning to notice those who are not reflecting....it only takes 2 minutes..

New forum topic posted on www.eftok.tk

Methodologies

The clip this week from youtube came from the movie "Dead Poets Society" well worth watching some time.

I showed this clip as it demonstrates the problem with methodologies for finding knowledge in the arts. If you can compare this with the three methodologies we discussed for science then you should be able to plan an essay for question 5 on the prescribed set essay list. You will see notes on the blog in November regarding the science methodologies.

Filtering language

Valerias comment made me remember this one. Does this work on all of you? any of you?
:
From Cambridge University. (allegedly - this did the global e mail rounds a few years ago)

Olny srmat poelpe can raed tihs.


cdnuolt blveiee taht I cluod aulaclty uesdnatnrd waht I was rdanieg. The
phaonmneal pweor of the hmuan mnid, aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at Cmabrigde Uinervtisy,

it deosn't mttaer in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoatnt tihng is taht the frist and lsat ltteer be in the rghit pclae. The rset can be a taotl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit a porbelm.

Tihs is bcuseae the huamn mnid deos not raed ervey lteter by istlef, but the wrod as a wlohe. Amzanig huh? yaeh and I awlyas tghuhot slpeling was ipmorantt! if you can raed tihs psas it on !!



Psas Ti ON !

Filtering Language

Can you think of any examples when you have filtered the words that come out of your mouth? They were not the first instinctive words in your mind? remember the test in class?

S*x
Sh*t
F**K

Six, Shot and Flak. Naturally!

This is a great reminder that we not only filter by perception (input) but by Language (output) as well. Thinking about interview techniques is another good way to recognize the way we filter our natural instincts with language. So, any examples of your own?

Reflecting on this weeks class. What did you make of our role play. I did some more reserach on the Tarara boom de ay theory. i think the original word hails from the Philippines, but its not a well known theory. Some housepoints available for anyone who can strengthen/ source this theory. I felt this theory was worthwhile and provokes another question. Why dance? I hope language originated from a state of celebration rather than necessity. Do you and does it matter in any case?

Argument sketch

I like the line "I could be arguing in my spare time". I showed you this as it's a classic insight into the British sense of humour. Monty Python are legendary, they are all Oxford graduates.
This sketch also shows us something about how we know via rationalism/reason. The entire sketch uses the language of reason. They argue about definitions of an argument(illustrating one of the issues we have we language as a way of knowing), they also engage in a deductive and seemingly logical discussion about what an argument is. This is ironic of course and leads eventually to an example of the fallacy in inductive logic ("I could be arguing in my spare time"). That statement is the "Black Swan" moment perhaps! So reason has been introduced this week and we will continue with ideas to do with logic next week. Please bring with you the set essay questions.

Language

This week we had a consensus! Well almost. 2 ways of considering language and our experience of life, the multiverse and everything (Karl, does it matter if the multi is hyphenated - ?)
By the way, I found my Thurs group inspired lyrics - they were " how can you find spirituality in the virtual world" you will need to join me and Boris for a Jam next Thurs lunchtime to hear the full song. The inspiration has been reading 1984 again and watching the movie "network" 1976. Before Helen left, I asked her what her favourite movie was and her first response was "network" it's full of good TOK " I want you to get mad" and " I am an angry prophet denouncing the hypocracies of our time " Semyen, you must have seen this?

Anyways--- consensus. Oh, in case your already bored. Stay here.. look




Theres nothing in it so don't look back! Honestly I learnt a lot/ was reminded of a lot today and yesterday!

Thoughtfish:

Consensus: Our reality is either defined by our language (liguistic determinism) OR our reality is pure and real and the language comes afterwards when necessary (linguistic realism). I think by the way, maybe some of you should begin a wiki group for CAS. Its definitely Service hours and global.

During the exercise on Thurs we listed the 15 words that had to be kept in the dictionary at all cost. We had good debate about the word "God". I would not put the word in my list because I had the word "chance" there. Does this deserve further debate? Now, if any of you just stood up and then forgot why, Boris has a word for that!
Great thinking this week all. See you next week.

p.s. check on ultimatefrizbee at youtube Joeys Thesaurus, interview with Steven Pinker and Osho explaining why word number 14 on my list is the most versatile in the English language.

Read below about the Orca killing a trainer this week...

Killer Whales: do they kill because of slavery?

Click here for full story

This article gives a critical opinion not only of animals in captivity, but perhaps challenges us to consider what we are usually told about life for Orcas at sea parks. Where would you find confirmation of these claims? What credentials do the authors have?

BLOG FOLLOWERS

IN THE COMMENT BOX PUT YOUR BLOG ADDRESS,
NEW WORD:BLOGAMYST: ONE WHO FOLLOWS MANY MANY BLOGS, NOT JUST THEIR OWN (BLOGMONOLIST). LINGUISTIC DETERMINISM? Remember to create your own word for next time we have class. Word and meaning.

Language of newspeak

newspeak dictionary

"The purpose of Newspeak was not only to provide a medium of expression for the world-view and mental habits proper to the devotees of IngSoc (English Socialism), but to make all other modes of thought impossible. It was intended that when Newspeak had been adopted once and for all and Oldspeak forgotten, a heretical thought -- that is, a thought diverging from the principles of IngSoc -- should be literally unthinkable, at least so far as thought is dependent on words." 1984, George Orwell

what the bleep do we know?

Bleep">Follow this link but remember to be thinking about the CREDENTIALS of each of these speakers (end of movie titles).

Brown eyes Blue eyes experiment

This is footage showing a teacher undertaking a daring lesson the day after Martin Luther King was shot. She set up this lesson to teach about the unfairness of discrimination but it allows us to ponder some difficult questions regarding human nature. Click here to view

Digital Media Resources

Here is a blog database of good TOK discussion ideas. This blog was started by students of a former colleague of mine - makes you think what you can build by starting and committing to a blog. Try This for lots of TOK Digital media resources. It's like landing in Aladdins Cave of critical thinking!

Forum: Life, the multiverse and everything!

All Ib students are to register and post a forum topic on a TOK thought to get the forum up and running by next Monday (8th February). You can register and get started by clicking here. Life, the multi-verse and everything!

Presentations, quotations

This weeks TOK demonstrated a number of very good reminders of best practice. If you saw Karl, Sofia and Daria today then you were able to see what an A grade student does. They were on time with their presentation, they were confident enough to step up and talk, they were creative in both their preparation and during their respective presentations and each of them had a quality TOK moment (in fact Sofia had two (one of which made my head ache!)!). However my personal favourite was Daria's quotation within here final panel of her cartoon strip, I reproduce it here, well done all 3 of you. "Time is the best falsifier" -Brilliant!

Reason, does God exist?

Although the ideas here are time consuming to read through, it is a good demonstration of a logically constructed argument. This article might just make future debates about the likelihood of "God" more interesting.

sciences, methods

Empirical evidence is evidence we have tested by observing something ourself via our senses. As we have seen in the different way we process sensory information, our perception is not always 100% reliable, so a way of testing empirical evidence is provided by following a scientific approach.


This week we have looked at 4 possible approaches to explain the true scientific method.

These are:

Inductivism.
Falsification.
Paradigms.
Anarchist.



The original scientific methods were best described perhaps as inductivism and is a simplistic approach discussed by David Hume amonst others. It means if you observe an event and a cause/ occurence many times then a general statement of likelihood of cause can be set up and either described as true or false. As we will discover when we study issues with reasoning, inductive logic leads to mistakes in assumptions and the occurence of the fallacy of induction. (A fallacy means an unexpected mistake).

Falsification is the usual and most respected idea about the scientific method. YOU MUST TRY TO REMEMBER THIS (!)idea. It was published by Karl Popper. It means in science you make an observation and suggest a theory. You then disprove all other possible explanations leaving your theory as the most trustworthy.

Paradigm theory refers to a belief put forward by Kuhn, that scientists in reality are guided in their viewpoints and by underlying belief systems. They are unwitting slaves to their deep held beliefs and therefore cling to much to personal hypothesis and are ego driven in defence of their theories. This is an interesting idea when you consider why it took so long for theories such as evolution to be generally accepted, and perhaps why counter theories to global warming are dismissed very quickly by most.
Anarchist theory published by Paul Feyeraband and in this Feyeraband argues that actually most scientific discoveries have been down to chance and serendipity, that anything useful has been found by initial mistakes and subsequent sagacity to spot an opportunity.

Science, Baloney detection kit

Michael Shermer is the founder of the skeptics society and bases the ideas here and below upon original work by Carl Sagan, who now recently deceased was and still is one of the USA's most well known and globally respected scientists. In his book "the Demon Haunted world" he presents his baloney (meaning nonsense) detection kit. It is used by skeptics to find good science and to dismiss bad or psuedoscience. This clip below gives a good introduction. The kit is useful for us to help us establish knowledge that is trustworthy.



These ideas are useful for our discussion and the essay title: Art upsets; science reassures. Discuss.

You can see a written summary of these arguments here

Michael Shermer states further:
Clearly, there are no foolproof methods of detecting baloney or drawing the boundary between science and pseudoscience. Yet there is a solution: science deals in fuzzy fractions of certainties and uncertainties, where evolution and big bang cosmology may be assigned a 0.9 probability of being true, and creationism and UFOs a 0.1 probability of being true. In between are borderland claims: we might assign superstring theory a 0.7 and cryonics a 0.2. In all cases, we remain open-minded and flexible, willing to reconsider our assessments as new evidence arises. This is, undeniably, what makes science so fleeting and frustrating to many people; it is, at the same time, what makes science the most glorious product of the human mind.



The Author:
Michael Shermer is founding publisher of Skeptic magazine and author of
The Borderlands of Science.