# data[].attributes.headline
Castalia, Michael, Michelle, Stella - 4. Do we underestimate the challenges of taking knowledge out of its original context and transferring it to a different context? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

# data[].attributes.subject
Castalia, Michael, Michelle, Stella - 4. Do we underestimate the challenges of taking knowledge out of its original context and transferring it to a different context? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
1. This question asks the writer for examples of knowledge being taken out of its original context and being transferred to a different context, then requires the writer to identify the challenges associated with them. With this information, the writer is expected to assume a position on whether or not we underestimate these challenges and justify their position with reference to two from five areas of knowledge: mathematics, the natural sciences, the human sciences, the arts, and history.

2.

Truth: The transfer of knowledge from one context to another can cause its truth to be distorted, as something that is true in one context may not remain true in another.

Justification: The transfer of knowledge from one context to another can cause it to appear less justified and subject it to distortions like straw man arguments, since the justification might lie within the surrounding context.

Perspective: Transferring knowledge from one context to another can cause it to be mixed with personal values or background that influence the writer's perspective. This knowledge can also be perceived in a different way in one context compared to how it is perceived in another.

3. The perspectives that sprang to mind on first reading of this question are:
- that the challenges are underestimated
- that the challenges are not underestimated
- that the challenges are underestimated in some cases but not others

4. It implies that there is knowledge taken out of its original context and transferring it to some other context. It also implies that the answer is either a “yes” or “no”. Both success stories (the challenges were not underestimated) and failure stories (the challenges were underestimated) can be used to aid in answering this question.

5. The following are several examples of what can be discussed to answer the question:
- An example from the natural sciences on how to answer this question is knowledge acquired from scientific experiments being used to support pseudoscientific justifications or practices. This can be filtered through the values held by those who transfer the knowledge, whether they be more logically inclined or value spirituality over logic. Their values could cause them to twist the knowledge to fit those values. In this case, values could become a challenge in the process of taking knowledge out of its original context and transferring it to another.
- Another example from the natural sciences could be transferring raw data acquired from experiments into a report or paper with more digestible formatting and supporting interpretation. To avoid underestimating the challenges involved with transferring knowledge, such as misinterpretations, misleading representations, or the influence of personal biases, these papers are often peer reviewed, which will increase the success rate of transferring knowledge from one context to another without altering the knowledge itself or portraying the knowledge in an inaccurate light.
- One other example can be seen in the field of history. Historical events are recorded by historians, preserved through eyewitness accounts, or inferred from physical evidence. Since one cannot travel back in time, the original context of the knowledge is no longer available, and transferring the knowledge from when it is first acquired to longer lasting records like history books would face a number of challenges that can result in inaccuracies if underestimated.

6. How much of the knowledge’s original context has to be omitted or modified to be considered a completely different context?

# data[].attributes.body
1. What does this question (“Prescribed Title”) mean to me?

2. What are the key TOK concepts in the question? Explain.

3. Which arguments / perspectives spring to mind on first reading of this question?

4. What implications spring to mind on first reading of this question?

5. What do I already know that I can bring to this question?

6. What do I not understand about this question?

# data[].attributes.headline
Kayla, Michael, Nathania - Prompt 4: Do we underestimate the challenges of taking knowledge out of its original context and transferring it to a different context? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

# data[].attributes.subject
Kayla, Michael, Nathania - Prompt 4: Do we underestimate the challenges of taking knowledge out of its original context and transferring it to a different context? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The essay title is asking whether we tend to overlook the difficulties involved in acquiring and selecting knowledge from a particular context and applying it to a different situation.

2. The key TOK concepts in this question are interpretation, certainty, and justification.
i. Interpretation: Each individual or group may interpret knowledge differently, which can influence its transferability and applicability to other contexts.
ii. Certainty: The certainty we feel about knowledge in one context may rely on specific factors, evidence, or reasoning only applicable to that context. However, when we transfer that knowledge to a different context, new variables or alternative perspectives can arise, which can undermine its certainty
iii. Justification: When transferring knowledge to a different context, the justifications that were valid in the original context may not hold the same relevance in the new context.

3. The possibility of deconstructing and applying a math formula proposed for a certain use into another problem.

Example: Neglecting the air resistance when measuring the speed of an object in physics.

4. Undermining the challenges of applying knowledge to a new context can lead to hasty yet unsuccessful conclusions. Overlooking the factors and variables that shape knowledge in its original context can diminish its significance. Invalid assumptions may be made, resulting in unreliable conclusions.

On the other hand, not undermining the challenges makes reaching a viable conclusion more difficult but increases the likelihood of accuracy. Recognizing these challenges enhances our understanding of the knowledge at hand. Awareness of contextual factors, biases, and limitations enables a more informed analysis and interpretation of the knowledge. By acknowledging the challenges, we strive for a comprehensive understanding of the knowledge, ensuring that it is appropriately adapted and applied to the new context.

5. Sometimes taking a knowledge out of its original context, transferring it towards a different context, this action can be done but requires a mastery over the certain knowledge.

Examples:

Electrical engineering students read about circuitry and electricity in an introductory course. The instructor brings market products into class for students to apply their knowledge dissecting and rebuilding.

In class, students in public health learn about tracking the spread of influenza in an urban American community. Over spring break the class takes an international trip, and does field work charting the spread of a different virus through a rural community, applying related concepts from their class work.

A creative writing student takes a course on Shakespearean drama. Over the course of the semester she continues to write her own play, drawing from techniques and structures throughout her coursework.

An economics student writes several papers on Game Theory throughout her undergraduate degree. She accepts a management position in an organization that assists a variety of nonprofit efforts. Although she does not apply Game Theory per se, she applies her knowledge of economic cooperation to ensure smooth operations.

6. Do some elements of the original context always remain with the knowledge?

# data[].attributes.headline
Title 5 - "Do we need custodians of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge." (Bianca, Justrene, Juyong, Zara)

# data[].attributes.subject
Title 5 - "Do we need custodians of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge." (Bianca, Justrene, Juyong, Zara)

# data[].attributes.body
1. Should there be a curator who sets a standard for knowledge? A custodian is an organisation or a person that will overlook every detail or change in knowledge. Having access to all knowledge is to have access to every private detail of anyone, which can ultimately be harmful to companies and individuals. This question can be referred to the area of knowledge of natural sciences and indigenous knowledge systems.

2. Responsibility: the custodians would be bestowed with a lot responsibility to overlook the knowledge. Power: if someone has control over the entirety of knowledge, they would be given too much power.

3. A lot of problems may come up with the custodians. How do we convince the world that this custodian deserves to dictate what it and isn't knowledge. What happens when this organization is affected by third party powers such as politics?

4. How to convince the world that they need a custodian in charge of the knowledge and to trust the custodians.

5. International Prototype of Kilogram: This is the standard of the kilogram which may be the standard that custodians of knowledge wish to preserve, but it is not even constant because it is getting lighter by the years. So does this example defeat the purpose of having a custodian of knowledge?

6. Who is the "we" that the question refers to?

# data[].attributes.headline
3. Nothing is more exciting than fresh ideas, so why are areas of knowledge often so slow to adopt them? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.(CELESTINE ANGELINA THERESA JUAN)

# data[].attributes.subject
3. Nothing is more exciting than fresh ideas, so why are areas of knowledge often so slow to adopt them? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.(CELESTINE ANGELINA THERESA JUAN)

# data[].attributes.body
1.  This question means that some areas of knowledge like human sciences and arts are slow to adopt to knowledge, in our opinion this title is discussing about how there might be some limitations like cultural barriers,  different perspectives that may be considered as the norm, etc.
2. Certainty and Evidence. This is because evidence is needed required to serve as a proof for new fresh ideas that are given to people. Certainty is needed in order for fresh ideas because they are usually vague, which lacks support. People may be afraid of new ideas, which now where certainty plays a big role in this question.
3. One argument that we are able to ascertain would be the validity of mental health. The awareness of mental health is a very new topic where although it presents fresh ideas, there are still many people who aren't open to this concept due to the lack of certainty that they have in regards to this topic. However, there is astounding evidence, such as research papers from scholars, that discusses about this.
4. It takes time to prove something that is new, to be certain as well as to compile evidence in regards to such ideas.
5: We are already aware that accepting new ideas are fairly difficult. This derives from the fact that people are afraid of change, etc. These group of people might already percieve the information of the past as the status quo.
6: We're still a bit confused whether a fresh idea would classify as something that is entirely new, or an adjustment of an well-established piece of information/knowledge.

# data[].attributes.headline
Topic 1: Is subjectivity overly celebrated in the arts but unfairly condemned in history? Discuss with reference to the arts and history.

# data[].attributes.subject
Topic 1: Is subjectivity overly celebrated in the arts but unfairly condemned in history? Discuss with reference to the arts and history.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Arts can be overly subjective since it is a reflection of a person's identity and everybody is inherently different. On the other hand, history is perceived to be an accurate depiction of the past, therefore subjectivity is often condemned in history.

2.
Perspective: The inherent definition of subjectivity is the quality of being based on or influenced by personal feelings, tastes, or opinions. Hence, perspective plays a major role in interpretation.
Objectivity: The reliability and replicability of a result determines the objectivity of the information gained. Thus, the unnecessary stress placed on the objectivity of history is  inaccurate to the nature of the subject.
3. The question itself makes us think of Hitler.
4. How much of art is truly considered art? How much of history is truly accurate?
5. Case studies that show that history is often subjective.
6. Why is it important?

# data[].attributes.headline
Topic 6 :Are we too quick to assume that the most recent evidence is inevitably the strongest? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge. - Jessica, Nicholas, Kate

# data[].attributes.subject
Topic 6 :Are we too quick to assume that the most recent evidence is inevitably the strongest? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge. - Jessica, Nicholas, Kate

# data[].attributes.body
Areas Of Knowledge -> Natural Sciences and History
1. We believe that the question is asking us whether we are too hasty to agree with new information given to us. It's asking us if we do or do not take new evidence with skepticism or do we take it without thinking twice.
2. Evidence, Truth, Interpretation, Justification, Explanation, Objectivity, Perspective
These TOK concepts relate to the acquisition of knowledge, and through the acquisition of knowledge, inevitably all of these concepts will be talked about.
3.
- Teachers ask us to get information within 5 years of range and consider older information as unreliable
- We don't usually take things with skepticism we just believe whatever our peers say
4. That it's a bad thing that we believe that the latest evidence is the strongest. Usually, that is in fact the case, however the question phrases it in a way where it looks like that idea is wrong
5. Our youth tends to be attracted to things that are new instead of old, things that just came out and we just believe things because of our desire to see new things
6. How do we apply it to other knowledges other than natural sciences

# data[].attributes.body
How can we reconcile the opposing demands for specialization and generalization in the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and one other area of knowledge.

Matthew, Christa, Max

1. Through Math and another area of knowledge, how do we find harmony between the need for generalization and specialization when establishing knowledge.
2. Perspective, Explanation, Justification, objectivity, Certainty
3. There needs to be a balance between the methods of generalizing concepts and specializing the perspectives that indicate objective truth
4. Theories in mathematics have been providing generalization of knowledge through the repeatability of the theory. It is rarely challenged and just universally accepted.
5. We have a general idea of the question and the meaning of generalization
6. What does specialization mean in this context.