Crafting a compelling argument for a TOK essay requires balancing intuition, evidence, and critical reflection. Here's a streamlined three-step process to guide you in building arguments that align with the PT while showcasing your analytical skills.
Step 1: Unpack the PT and Draft an Argument with Gut Feeling
1.
Interpret the Title: Identify key terms or phrases in the title.
•
For example, if the title asks about "certainty in the pursuit of knowledge," think about what certainty means to you and how you’ve encountered it.
2.
Ask Yourself Key Questions:
•
Which AoKs immediately come to mind for this title?
•
What examples seem relevant?
•
What TOK concepts (e.g., evidence, justification, or power) could connect with this?
3.
Write Down a Draft Argument: Use your intuition to form a rough thesis or statement that responds to the title. Don’t worry about perfection; focus on expressing your gut reaction.
Example: "Historians and human scientists share an ethical obligation to consider contradictory evidence, as ignoring it can distort the pursuit of objective understanding; however, the extent of this obligation differs. In History, selective evidence risks shaping biased narratives while in the Human Sciences, empirical methodologies allow contradictory evidence to be managed systematically."
Step 2: Research Real-Life Situations (RLS) That Support the Idea
1.
Identify Relevant RLS: Choose specific, real-world examples that align with the PT and AoKs.
•
Avoid RLSs that many students might also consider using. In other words, start with what you already know and begin your research for more complex and sophisticated RLSs.
•
Utilize AI-platforms (e.g., ChatGPT) to brainstorm ideas.
◦
“List 5 examples of real-life situations when past historians did not ignore contradictory evidence.”
◦
“Generate 3 more examples of real-life situations when historians did not ignore contradictory evidence which significantly contributed to unveiling the narratives of social minorities.”
2.
Pick a RLS That Strengthens Your Argument: Analyze examples critically, linking them to at least 2 TOK concepts each.
•
Conduct deeper research of the different examples and cross-check information and facts generated by the AI through reliable sources.
◦
Save all your sources for in-text citations and bibliography.
•
Check with an AI-platform (e.g., ChatGPT) to ensure its application to the prompt and capability to generate a layered discussion.
◦
“For the IB ToK prescribed title [prompt], would [RLS] be a good example to investigate?”
◦
“What are two significant ToK concepts this RLS could be related to and how?”
3.
Gather RLS That Offers a Counterpoint: Find examples that allow you to address the nuances of the argument.
•
Utilize AI-platforms (e.g., ChatGPT) to again brainstorm ideas.
◦
“List 5 examples of real-life situations when past historians did ignore contradictory evidence.”
◦
“Generate 3 more examples of real-life situations when historians were forced to ignore contradictory evidence due to political oppression.”
•
Ensure that your RLSs do not overlap in its nature and focus.
◦
For instance, if you choose an example from the natural sciences that address confirmation bias of an experiment, you should not choose another experimental study from the human sciences that also discusses confirmation bias.
•
Push yourself to research more about examples that you were not previously familiar with. Again, this increases the likelihood of your RLSs not overlapping with another student’s.
Step 3: Revisit the Initial Argument and Deepen It
1.
Evaluate Your Argument: Return to your initial argument and question whether it supports your gut feeling or suggests modifications to your argument.
•
Ask whether there are any unexpected insights or implications that emerged during your research.
2.
Consider implications: Reflect on what this argument suggests about the broader theme of knowledge and the knower.
•
Connect back to the core theme and what your argument says about the nature of knowledge as a whole.
Example: "While History aims to provide a coherent understanding of the past, its reliance on subjective interpretation and fragmented evidence reveals that our perception of historical truth is deeply influenced by the perspectives and biases we, as knowers, bring to the construction of knowledge."