SCOPE by Marilynne Sinclair https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds 1) Select 1 AOK column (first come first served!); 2) Add your name; 3) Show how 1 KQ from your section (AOK + Scope) in the Guide can be answered; 4) Show how this question can or cannot be transferred to a different AOK. en-us 2022-02-06 22:54:57 UTC 2025-11-02 05:40:55 UTC hello@padlet.com Vinnie https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2035730925 2022-02-08 15:20:10 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2035730925 Matthew https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2037587943 2022-02-09 10:33:35 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2037587943 Knowledge Question: https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2037714672 Is the relationship between “knowing how” and “knowing that” different in the arts compared to other areas of knowledge? Does art enlarge what it is possible for us to think and know?

]]> 2022-02-09 12:00:42 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2037714672 3) Answering the Knowledge Question https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2038823723 The question can be answered within the context of the arts, through the following example:                     

Stuart Buchanan Semple: 
Stuart Semple is a multidisciplinary artist who created black 3.0, the most light absorbent paint in the world. Sometimes referred to as the blackest black, Semple wanted to create a paint substance that absorbed as close to 100% of the light incident up a surface coated in the paint. He had the “knowing that”, equating to the artistic vision, but had yet to envisage or execute the “knowing how”. 

To begin, Semple and his team went back to the basics of paint making. Most black pigments have a sheen to them, which are corrected using slightly grey pigments. The result is a black paint, which does not absorb as much light as Semple was hoping for. Thus, with his team - to avoid that reflection, that shine - they created their own pigment called Black Magick, along with a new acrylic polymer to bind the pigment. 

Semple says that the polymer has more available bonds than any other acrylic polymer being used currently in paints. This results in a higher pigment density and depth of colour not previously possible. The end result is an incredibly black paint which absorbs somewhere between 98% and 99% of all light incident on the surface.

The “knowing that” and “knowing how” could be considered, for the artist in this case, different to that of the material scientist for example. In the arts, the artist has the vision and then must find the best way to realise that vision. Here, Semple assembles a team of experts in various fields in order to realise this vision through innovative or creative techniques. The artist does not in this case have the ‘Know How’, but attains the ‘Know Who’ through research and discovery. The material scientist would have the theoretical understanding of the physics and chemistry behind the mechanism in order to undertake experimentation toward the goal. The artist has the intermediate step in this case, of finding those experts and eliciting their “KnowHow”.  

Although Semple cannot claim to have been the originator of the idea of the ‘Blackest Black’, that accolade going to Anish Kapoor who enlarged our understanding of what was possible from a material science perspective. Kapoor patented the technology, to keep it out of the hands of other artists. Kapoor had enlarged our knowledge of what we thoughts possible, but had been unwilling to share this knowledge. Semple saw this as a challenge and set about creating a superior pigment from the ground up. He enlisted over 1000 other artists who served as testers for the paint and exceeded the expectations of what was thought possible commercially and thus enlarged our knowledge of what was thought possible.  Although Semple cannot claim to have been the originator of the idea of the ‘Blackest Black’, that accolade going to Anish Kapoor who enlarged our understanding of what was possible from a material science perspective. Kapoor patented the technology, to keep it out of the hands of other artists. Kapoor had enlarged our knowledge of what we thoughts possible, but had been unwilling to share this knowledge. Semple saw this as a challenge and set about creating a superior pigment. He enlisted over 1000 other artists who served as testers for the paint and exceeded the expectations of what was thought possible commercially and thus enlarged our knowledge of what was thought possible.  ]]> 2022-02-09 20:17:12 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2038823723 How can this Question can be transferred to another AOK https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2038917865

In the example given, it is clear that with a slight shift of focus, the question could be applied to the Natural Sciences. The focus for the Natural Sciences could be on the members of the team and more technical detail relating to the process of development of the pigment and polymer. This would not diminish the nature of the vision of the artist, Semple, but would enhance this vision through scientific and technological innovation. 
]]> 2022-02-09 21:16:47 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2038917865 Manu mmr6 https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2039452320 2022-02-10 04:29:06 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2039452320 Peter https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2041301014 2022-02-10 22:42:03 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2041301014 "What role does mathematics play within the human sciences?" https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2041312094 I was a little surprised to find myself selecting this KQ because maths is my least accessible subject. Nonetheless, it stuck out for me. I think this question is really interesting as it forces us to think about the type of evidence and data that we use to understand human beings. Is soft data or hard data more useful? Do they both play a vital role? If we rely on hard data are we being too rigid in describing human behavior? If we rely on soft data are we over-relying on data that could be too subjective? What challenges do we run into when trying to interpret the hard data? - There is a lot to discuss and unpack here. Overall, I think this question leads us to explore the methods that are used to acquire knowledge in the human sciences and to really think about the TOK concepts of evidence, interpretation, certainty. - One thing I love sharing with my TOK classes is the work of Hans Rosling - who compiled and communicated statistics in order to help explain the way the world is. This website is great for students to explore and think about the benefits of statistics: https://www.gapminder.org/]]> 2022-02-10 22:53:26 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2041312094 How can this question be transferred to another AOK? https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2041316767 I think the obvious transfer would be to the natural sciences. Students can open up discussion and exploration on the differing roles of mathematics in these two distinct sciences. This can then lead to an understanding of the differences and similarities of these two sciences. 

However, another AOK that would be interesting to compare is History. Both Human Sciences and History share a sense of learning about the human experience. Students can explore how historians use statistical data in order to interpret the past. Just like with Human Sciences they can compare this to the soft data that historians may interpret (interviews, letters, eyewitness testimonies, etc...) An amazing video that I often show in my History class is this: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwKPFT-RioU&t=64s

It is called "The Fallen of WW2" and even though it completely focuses on statistics, it turns out to be extremely emotional.

]]> 2022-02-10 22:58:35 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2041316767 Tareq https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2044442017 2022-02-13 11:04:54 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2044442017 "Do the natural sciences rely on any assumptions that are themselves unprovable by science?" https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2044443304 2022-02-13 11:07:00 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2044443304 The answer of course depends on what layers of abstraction we take for granted. We also must set aside metaphysics. For certain we can discover for example the ways in which gravity works, but we would be hard pressed to define exactly what it is. This is not in the scope of the natural sciences, which rely upon induction from unprovable or as of yet unknowable axioms. I love discussions such as these because I find it immensely useful to students to get them to think axiomatically about problems. Breaking them down into they foundations to discover precisely what it is they are and are not taking for granted. https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2044447138 2022-02-13 11:11:57 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2044447138 This is extremely transferrable to say the social or "Human Sciences" since they also make use of axiomatic thinking, often unknowingly. We take a few things that are difficult to prove for granted so we can say more interesting things about broader themes. The more we take for granted, the less sure of the truth of our knowledge we are. The question really comes down to this: What are the foundations of knowledge, the fundamentals upon which all else is built, and are they worth the painstaking efforts required to truly understand them? Or should they be accepted on faith? https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2044448821 2022-02-13 11:14:26 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2044448821 Knowledge question: https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2046385000  Is mathematics better defined by its subject matter or its method? ]]> 2022-02-14 14:46:46 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2046385000 Answer: https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2046406586 When one 'treats a topic mathematically', one is engaged in certain methods and processes that are core to mathematics and are developed progressively, building on mathematical subject matter itself. Primarily, thus, mathematics may be considered better known for its method. However, when considered in terms of applying mathematics, the subject matter is equally important. I would say that establishing something as knowledge in mathematics involves proving something in abstraction, reaching to universally accepted axioms, and so on, hence, bring the method to the forefront.]]> 2022-02-14 14:54:48 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2046406586 For a different AOK: https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2046424992 Due to the close connection between mathematics and the natural sciences, it is interesting to consider this knowledge question in natural sciences as well. Natural sciences too have significant aspects of method, such as classification, experimentation, observation, inferring, and so on. These methods are as essential as the subject matter. 

However, within the AOK itself, in both mathematics and natural sciences, previously established subject matter is very essential in developing new subject matter using the methods in that AOK. Hence, the debate can be an interesting one when considering development of new knowledge.]]> 2022-02-14 15:01:45 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2046424992 Knowledge Question https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2047411187 What counts as a fact in history?]]> 2022-02-14 23:59:52 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2047411187 Answer https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2047535677 To answer this question you have to ask a few questions. Can we know that facts are true? Where did the fact come from? As a Historian we are told to trust what we see as physical evidence. You can read a claim about history in a book and are told that it's fact. But, how do we know? I find this question almost impossible to answer. I feel like anything counts as fact in history because you can always find something (artifacts, books, etc.) to help prove your thought. So, if you would like a complete answer to: What counts as fact in history? The answer is whatever evidence you have in front of you until proven false. ]]> 2022-02-15 01:38:09 UTC https://padlet.com/msinclair/gqzli5we37iu0bds/wish/2047535677