# data[].attributes.body
1. The alternative RLS provides an alternative viewpoint of judging the quality of arts. The alternative RLS is about an artist who tattoes live and dead animals. This is very unconventional yet people still believe that this art, evident in there being "collectors" of his art. Hence, this is a good example to show that there other ways to determine the quality of art

# data[].attributes.body
The source is credible, but the example does not justify the claim, as the knowledge question does not really give any space for a counter argument due to the narrowness of the example, making it difficult for the example to be effective, though the example is indeed credible.
The explanation is only satisfying to the reader when there is enough basis to go upon for the presentation; however, in this case, both the justification and the counter-argument is very brief and unfocused, which makes this presentation hard to understand and appreciate due to the complexity of the art form which is highly focused discussion, but not discussing the real TOK topics at hand, and their links to other forms.

# data[].attributes.body
0. Their theories were not establisehd.
1. It is not effecive as it only uses one example and the example should be a bit broader and they didn't use their knowledge claims to counter their point of view. And the theories they brought out they did not link it to the RLS and they didn't really provide citation for their sources, they just put the information there

# data[].attributes.body
1. The example is effective to a certain extent. It is effective as he does explore Kantian Ethics, however he does not seem to have applied it to the RLS which the article is referring to. Whilst he had also made a reference to subjectivity, he again did not elaborate on this point of his argument, which could have been a counterclaim to his Knowledge Claim.
2. Justification is satisfactory when both perspectives of the argument are discussed with relevant evidence for both points of the argument.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The examples are not very effective because the student only used one example when they could have included more sources from the RLS. They did not state other counterclaims for their RLS. However, they used other real life examples that makes their stand more credible and effective such as the olden-jorgensen and thuren's principal of source criticisms.
2. Justification is something that proves something and has explanation to support the idea, and to show your audience that your results are credible. One way to do that is to compare sources and explaining the different points of view.

# data[].attributes.body
1. It is effective because the use of the examples helps the readers understand how we can approach determining whether an action or behaviour is ethical or unethical through the given examples and ways of knowing - language, emotion, intuition and reason.
2. We believe that the justification is satisfying enough only when the justification is able to answer and provide explanations for any queries and doubts the reader will have when they first come across the KQ. Furthermore, it also should leave little to no room for questions and doubts in the given and chosen perspective.

# data[].attributes.body
1. The examples are effective because it discusses TOK concepts relating to the RLS such as the inclusion of Olden-Jorgensen and Thuren's method of source criticism. Thus, there is an appropriate evaluation of the stand that is taken by the RLS, allowing for discussion of both sides of the argument in order to bring in broad TOK concepts that are relevant for discussion

2. When there is a thorough explanation of both sides of the argument and there is an appropriate conclusion to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of said argument

# data[].attributes.body
1. The examples are effective to a certain extent. The examples used help us to gain understanding on the concepts they cover. However, they are also not effective as they only used one source. Their only source was the article which described the RLS. For the knowledge claims, they didn't cite their source and just defined the concepts covered.
2. They didn't really justify the source of the concepts that they talked about, they didn't compare their examples with other sources to determine its credibility or to support their argument. To us justification requires comparison with other sources to ensure least biasness

# data[].attributes.body
1. It is quite effective as they bring up the 5 senses of a human and link it to the different elements of art by explaining how the 5 senses allows us to observe the artwork and hence admire it. However, they do not relate their knowledge claim to the RLS much, hence making it quite redundant.

2. Justification would be to analyse the source and provide relevant explanations to why an argument supports the claim made. In this case, the student attempted to use TOK concepts to link his RLS to his claims on what he perceives as art, and this serves as the justification towards why his claims are valid.

# data[].attributes.body
1. Answer to question 1
2. Answer to question 2

# data[].attributes.body
Siddique & Ethel
Joshua & Prashant
Jaehyun & Jerome

# data[].attributes.body
Khushi & Lynn
Imran & Dong Jun
Joan & Marcus

# data[].attributes.body
Justin & Clara
Khoa & Axel
Jaedon & Jayson
John