Blog Post #2: The Space Between...

For my second blog post, we were asked to reflect on some of the topics discussed in last class. One being our clouded concept of certainty and whether total certainty actually exists. This is quite a messy topic to discuss so sorry if I seriously ramble in this post. If we think of certainty with our ToK brains then in my opinion it does not exist. Our strive as human beings is curiosity, curiosity about simplistic or complex theories we can only hope to imagine. As a race, we have a motivation to find an answer for everything but these answers are never full proof that is why many are just theories. However, even if we look away from these deeper subjects for a second and say that you are certain your name is your name. It is so easy to break down that unquestionable truth, how do you know your parents didn't change your name, how do you know you aren't a dream created by someone else with a different name, how do we know? Ignoring theories, everyday items can become disputable. For example, there is a red book in front of you but how is that manifestation evident. Yes, to you there is a red book but what if that colour is seen differently from someone else? Is the validity of the colour still relevant give that each person may be interpreting it differently. What about it being in front of you, how can you trust the direction of the book when direction is another phantom idea derived form the human race. Also, we never actually know if it is there, there is the matrix theories and don't even get me started on whether it is a book or not.

It's not like we need certainty though. If a mysterious man came and started instructing us on what to be certain of and what not to be, giving us all the answers then we would still express distrust. Humans search for the answers of the universe and life but still doubt there own solutions, it's our way of life. In saying this, it's crazy to think that we aren't all in a mad house simply because we don't know what we don't know and don't know what we do know. This is the middle ground we live in, the middle ground between absolute certainty and absolute doubt. Living in this middle ground allows us to question and theorize without going insane over our ignorance and own theories.

Okay, I'm done questioning my existence so talk to you later.  

Blog Post #1: How do we know?, Maps, Certainty

04/09/2016

This is my first blog post, there is no specific direction for this post but let me start off by saying that the subject "theory of knowledge" equally intrigues me and makes me hate it. I absolutely love questioning everything as it unravels life as we know it but it also kills me every time I hear "How do we know?" It's simply something I have to get used to, get accustomed to and learn to love.

Let's begin with the quotation "The map is not the territory," by Alfred Korzybski and this seems quite basic to me but you never know I might be wrong, To me, it's conveying how no matter how hard you try to  make a map as accurate as possible it simply will not be the real thing. So if you tried to map out the same place as many times as you wanted to get it perfect, the image will simply never be the territory. For you, to understand the image and the place you must physically go to it and see it with your own eyes. This expresses the main portion of this subject as we as people may think we know something perfectly but we can never be a hundred percent sure until we have concrete evidence. Magritte, Rene's metaphor is also an example of this, we may think that what presented is a pipe but it's not. We respond ti the image but it's exactly that, an image, it's a canvas showing us a pipe but it is far from a pipe. Do I want to answer this question, "What other "maps" (concepts) from your life can you now question the certainty of? Does this mean that they are less helpful than you once thought?" because has made me question everything. I guess, images is now a big part of this but we also do this to ourselves with animation. 


Most aspects of Theory of knowledge can be translated to the other subjects we take in the DP. Especially Maths and Science are those are two "factual subjects when if you look back further enough or look at the theories there is no concrete evidence to supports its teachings. As for History, it's based on others memories and these memories could have a personal biased or perspective. These things could all exaggerated or simply made up because we are going off others teachings, we are placing our trust in people who do not know what they are talking about. While in Art, we are being taught about a visual representation that is interpreted differently by every single person. It's as if you were to teach a language in which everyone would understand differently but somehow can communicate slightly.

I think that's enough deep thinking for the end of the night, so we will discuss more later.