Documenti di Didattica
Documenti di Professioni
Documenti di Cultura
_______________________________________________________________________________________
THEORY OF KNOWLEDGE
ESSAY
__________________________________________________
School Name
TOK International
Candidate Name
Peremo Langlogic
Candidate Number
001234-001
Session
MAY 2011
Word Count
1, 272 words
PeremoLanglogic
Theory of Knowledge # 9:
Discuss the roles of language and reason in history
Historyandhistoriansaretwothingsthatcomplementeachotherfortheirownexistence.
Tobeexact,historyisanexponentofhistoriansinwhichonecannotsurvivewithoutthesignificant
other.Howdidthefactsemergeinthehistorybooks,encyclopediasofhistory,andbiographiesifit
isnotthehistoriansdoing?Itisthehistoriansjobtoincludeeventsineveryperiodofhistory,thus
thisdependsonthemtoclassifytheperiodsofhistoryinatimelinesuchasMedieval,Renaissance,
andReformationperiodorAmericanRevolution(17751783),FrenchRevolution(17891799),and
Napoleonic War (18001815). Before a historical event transpired, ways of knowing (language,
perception, reason, and emotion) are used by historians to examine evidences, interpret reliable
sources,justifytheoccurrence,anddeduceitscauses.
History is not a record of events, but the story in which historians decide to tell. The
subtletywithinhistorythatpeopleoftendisregardisthathistorianscarefullyselectwhicheventshas
takenplaceinthepast,sotodecidetheirprioritiesforthepresentandlatergenerationtoknow.To
whatextentcanthesestatementsbetrueandbelievableinhumanperception?Thisiswhenlogical
validityorrationaleisrequiredtoarticulate,justify,andassessknowledgeclaims.Everyknowledge
claims must have supportive evidence. In this case, historians refer to primary sources such as
eyewitness accounts, visual materials (sculptures and paintings), artifacts, and written or printed
documents(letters,treaties,manuscripts,journals,courtdecisions,andgovernmentlaws.)1
Inhistory,reasonisusedasaformofassuranceorclarificationtoinferencesgatheredfrom
primary sources. Coherence or consistency, as suppose, is a shared standard of evaluation when
restoringahistoricaleventparalleltotheevidences.Inahistoricaleventsuchasaseverepolitical
dispute,historiansmakeuseofreasoningtouncoverhiddenmotivesbehindthedeterminationofa
patriot,apoliticalruler,oranopposingcountry.However,whenitcomestothirdparties,anavid
readerofhistorywillusereasoningtoproceedwiththedeductions,compareopinions,andmayor
maynotaccepttheknowledgeclaimforitisratifiedorrejectedbyhisownbasisorground.People
lookforcoherenceoftheknowledgeclaimagainsttheactualproofbeforebelievingoracceptinga
particular notion. Therefore, the ability to reason an argument is important to assess a subject
critically,asinthiscontextishistory.
Although the most obvious and distinguishable use of language in history is seen by the
existenceofhistorybooks,almanacs,andencyclopaedias,itisrathersuperficialtosaythatlanguage
is only used in the presentation of historical events and information. Language may actually
stimulatethinkingprocessesandsubsequentlydrawsinotherwaysofknowing:reason,perception,
and emotion. Especially for readers and revisionists of history, they need the information to be
derivedfromlanguagewhichresultsinsubsequentthinkingprocesses.Nonetheless,languageisnot
http://www.library.ubc.ca/hss/primarysources.html
PeremoLanglogic
http://www.freethoughtdebater.com/tenbiblecontradictions.htm
http://www.uktoday.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/36630historybooksbiasedsaywriters
PeremoLanglogic
Finally, how do we verify the validity of a given assertion? Prior to record selection,
historians use reason and language to shape interpretations after examination of historical
evidences,puttingintoaccounttheemphasisoftheircausesandeffects.Alongtheway,historians
may cross path with issues of reliability of sources, issues of identifying cause, persuasion and
propaganda.Asaknowerinstead,wehavetobroadenourperspectivesbyexercisingallofourways
ofknowingtoeliminatepossiblebiases.
Bibliography
1.
Press,IBID,andMichaelWoolman.Waysofknowing:anintroductiontotheory
ofknowledge.2nded.1.Victoria:IBIDPress,2006.113.Print.
2.
"Reason."MoreWords.com.,19Feb2011.Web.20Feb2011.
<http://www.morewords.com/word/reason/>.
3.
"primarysources."UBCLibrary.TheUniversityofBritishColumbiaLibrary,19
Nov2008.Web.21Feb2011.
<http://www.library.ubc.ca/hss/primarysources.html>.
4.
"TOKwaysofknowing."Staianoland.N.p.,n.d.Web.20Feb2011.
<http://www.staianoland.com/pdf_files/tok/wok.pdf>.
5.
Blair.William."Historybooksbiased,saywriters."Mirror13Dec2010:n.pag.
Web.20Feb2011.<http://www.uk
today.net/mtcolumns/newscommentaries/36630historytextbooksbiasedsay
writers>.
6.
Edwards,P.Wesley."BibleErrorsandContradictions."FreethoughtDebater.
FreethoughtDebater,01sep2004.Web.21Feb2011.
<http://www.freethoughtdebater.com/tenbiblecontradictions.htm>.
__________________________________________________________________________________
THIS SECTION ONWARDS IS THE RESPONSE FROM tokessaycomments.com.
Overall comments
This section shows the overall comments provided by the staff that marked your essay.
The first thing that caught my eye was the length of your essay. Its just over two pages in
length. Given rather standard font size, most essays would be three to five pages in length,
depending on line spacing. I checked your word count 1272 corresponds to the entire text
cover page, your essay, footnotes and bibliography. Was this an oversight on your part?
4
PeremoLanglogic
You should only count the essay itself in this case, 1116 words. Since you have not fulfilled
the requirements for the word count (minimum of 1200 words), you will not earn more than 4
marks for Criteria D.
On the whole, you essay did not effectively address the question. This is largely due to
vague and general arguments. Where a clear argument is presented, it is usually not
developed well enough, and not backed up with relevant examples. KIs are not evident in
your essay. There were some bright moments, but these were not sustained throughout the
essay. Counterclaims were ignored in most cases. Personal examples were not given. Your
voice as a knower was not evident.
The question was very clear in that it asked for one AOK (History) and two WOKs (language
and reason). You did admirably by not only discussing the required AOK and WOKs, but
went beyond and made linkages to perception and emotion. The arguments need to be
strengthened though.
Assessment criteria
This section estimates the marks that you are likely to obtain for each criterion. The marks are
based on how well you have met each criterion.
Criteria A Your marks: 5 out of 10
You did not identify KIs in a clear manner. Implicitly, KIs are present so this qualifies as
some treatment of KIs. Some understanding is demonstrated. As pointed out in my
comments, some effective links are drawn. You need to identify your KIs clearly. Follow my
advice on the linkages between AOKs and WOKs (see my comments).
PeremoLanglogic
You have not scored well for this criterion due to a lack of personal involvement. Your voice
as a knower is not evident. You need to bring in your own examples and views.
Criteria C Your marks: 4 out of 10
Your performance for this criterion needs to be improved. This can be done by justifying your
arguments i.e. develop the arguments. You missed this in several paragraphs. You need to
include more counterclaims and some implications.
Criteria D Your marks: 4 out of 10
You qualify for 5 or 6 marks here, but unfortunately you would only earn the capped limit of 4 marks
due to not meeting the word limit. Of course, this can be easily overcome by ensuring that write at
least 1200 words. If you improve your work in the first three criterion, your performance for Criterion D
will almost automatically increase.
Total: 17 out of 40 (estimated)
Action Plan
This section provides suggestion on what needs to be done to improve your essay.
1. Read and digest my comments in the essay itself. Do as suggested e.g. remove
sections/add sections/add examples/change examples etc.
2. Be more focused. For each paragraph, identify one claim e.g. language can tell us
about history. Develop the arguments and give an example. Then think of a
counterclaim and develop that argument. You might add a counterclaim against the
counterclaim.
3. Add personal examples, but dont overdo it. Simple ways are to give personal
examples when you studied History, or maybe something you watched on History
Channel. Use phrases like in my opinion or I think when stating your personal
views.
4.
Keep this outline introduction, 3 arguments for language (claim and counterclaim),
3 for reason (claim and counterclaim)and conclusion.
PeremoLanglogic
Good luck!