# data[].attributes.headline
Anaya - Methodology and tools link to perspective

# data[].attributes.subject
Anaya - Methodology and tools link to perspective

# data[].attributes.body
Methodology and tools implemented for stakeholders to make arguments are heavily influenced by the perspective they're writing from. For example, if an individual intends to communicate that the legalization of marijuana had positive impacts upon the economy, they'd likely selectively use information to highlight the increase in tax revenue and easier controls on marijuana distribution. On the contrary, individuals that do not support this are likely to selectively use data that reflects the same. However, all stakeholders are likely to manipulate data rather than contort it completely, and therefore individuals don’t receive false information in order for websites to maintain their credibility. Additionally, neutral websites such as cato.org are likely to provide an balanced overview of the potential positive and negative implications of the policy.

# data[].attributes.body
Scope question: Do the benefits of legalising marijuana outweigh its negatives and how can we analyse this through objective data or social perceptions.

While analysing objective data, legalising marijuana may seem to be beneficial due to increased tax revenue and economic growth. Also looking at scientific data objectively, we may see some medical benefits that marijuana provides. However, looking at this from social perceptions may alter the result of this situation. This is because the knowers may perceive marijuana as negatively impacting a human's growth due to increases in dependency, decrease in productivity, youth and brain development. This showcases the different perspectives that is portrayed due to objectivity and social perceptions.

# data[].attributes.body
The medical cannabis policy relates directly to three major AOKs including Human Sciences and Ethics together with Natural Sciences. The techniques adopted by Human Sciences fields for example psychological studies surveys and sociological research determine how various interest groups including public health organizations and government entities alongside the cannabis industry evaluate risks and benefits related to legalization efforts. The research methods supply real-world data about both mental and social marijuana usage results to guide political choices. This AOK knowledge structure presents a wide breadth because it connects medical conduct patterns to social standards and economic behaviors which exhibits the intricate unified system between health and societal structures and legal frameworks. The conflict generates ethical issues about personal liberties as they compete against community welfare protocols. Public health entities support harm reduction initiatives because they derive ethical responsibility to protect defenseless groups yet the cannabis business concentrates on financial advantages together with individual governance rights. The ethical concerns between these views determine both the research instruments and scientific directions in cannabis research studies.

# data[].attributes.body
The legalization of marijuana in 2018 in Canada illustrates the ways in which perspectives influence what is researched and how. Government ministers were motivated by public health and economic benefits, whereas critics were concerned with youth access and road safety. This produced a concern with regulation over social impacts. How it was researched altered, policymakers referenced scientific studies, whereas advocacy groups employed ethical appeal. Statistics, legislation, and opinion polls were tools that aided knowledge claims in various ways. This relates to TOK, illustrating how perspectives influence what constitutes valid knowledge and posing questions about ethics, evidence, and rules in establishing truth.

# data[].attributes.body
Ethics (standards we set as a society) are relevant to this article as the extent to which our actions can be deemed ethical (scope of ethics) is done at the behest of involved stakeholders based on their Perspectives on the issue. For example, it may be ethical from the perspective of the Government / Society to use Methods & Tools that infringe on the freedoms of an individual for "the greater good" of a larger group, but at the same time the same actions could be seen as un-ethical by the individuals or consumers of a society as their personal freedoms such as freedom of choice have been infringed upon.

Even if there is a justified reasoning and objective evidence that supports the corrective measures taken by the Government in this article, the very definition of knowledge as per TOK is "justified true belief for me". This is perfectly illustrated by the article as even with the citations of negative consumption externalities such as adverse effects of consumption, the potential normalization of marijuana use by the American youth and an overall increase in public disorder there is still a pushback on the ethical front.

# data[].attributes.body
Data interpretations take their direction from stakeholder perspectives because their biases alongside their interests strongly affect the drawn conclusions. Governments use supporting data for marijuana taxation while industrial supporters use data confirming economic advantages. The range of external effects makes the decision about governmental restrictions and bans morally acceptable or not. Stigma-related perceptions often replace actual data by exercising stronger influence than actual evidence on public viewpoint. Public health-sensitive regulations which decrease short-term profits might pass ethical standards even though they stand against economic efficiency.

# data[].attributes.headline
Vyom - Methodology and tools link to Ethics 

# data[].attributes.subject
Vyom - Methodology and tools link to Ethics 

# data[].attributes.body
Methodology and ethics are very closely linked in ways I have learned through this activity. The methodology of collecting quantitative as well as qualitative data can be designed in a way very intricately to manipulate the results achieved by the study. This can be unethical as such claims proved using manipulated methodology could be misleading and potentially harm stakeholders like the government and consumers who make economic decisions based on such claims.

# data[].attributes.body
Ethics and perspective are linked as from the perspective of the government it may be ethical to restrict and tax marijuana for the welfare of society, but from the perspective of the citizens it may impinge on their rights to purchase goods for a fair price and may also be regressive, making it unethical to a good extent. The stakeholder's perspective here is what determines the ethicality of the action.

Ethics is also linked to the scope of the issue, as the negative consumption externalities of marijuana may be balanced to a certain extent by the perceived positive consumption externalities of the consumers, and the negative consumption externalities may not be objective, but based on an ethical issue with the consumption of the product and how it affects society

# data[].attributes.body
Consolidation Activity: Finding the Connections:

Prompts to Build Connections:

How do stakeholders' perspectives (AOK 2) influence the way data (AOK 3) is interpreted?

Does the scope of the externality (AOK 1) justify the ethical choices made by the government (AOK 4)?

How can subjective social perceptions (AOK 2) override objective quantitative data (AOK 3)?

Do ethical considerations always align with economic efficiency?