The document examines the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge despite problems of bias and selection. Using history and the human sciences as areas of knowledge, it analyzes how bias can influence the filtering and interpretation of information in both fields. While recognizing bias as an issue, it also acknowledges that knowledge is still possible if one considers the assumptions, perspectives, and limitations involved.

1. TOK Prescribed Title # 3
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection

2. Identify Key Words and Phrases
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection

3. Contestable Concepts in Context
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
ehavene the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection

4. Contestable Concept
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
ehavene the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection
Is this true?

5. Paul Revere's illustraion

6. John Pufford's Illustration

7. Command Term
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection

8. Command Term
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine Consider an argument or concept in a way that uncovers the
assumptions and interrelationships of the issue

9. Command Term
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine Consider an argument or concept in a way that uncovers the
assumptions and interrelationships of the issue

10. Command Term
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine Consider an argument or Claim in a way that uncovers the
Knowledge concept
assumptions and interrelationships of the issue

11. The Claim to be Examined
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection

12. The Claim to be Examined
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine the claim that It is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection.

13. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection

14. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection

15. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history

16. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history - What is it?

17. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history - What is it?
Define it

18. The Areas of Knowledge
In what ways is it Biased?
Using history - What is it?
Define it

19. The Areas of Knowledge
In what ways is it Biased?
Using history - What is it?
Define it
What problems of
selection?

20. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history - What is it?

21. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history - What is it?
In History, the historian has to filter information, looking for the relevant facts.
What are the problems inherent in this? Doesn’t this filtering depend on the
historian? The historian’s culture? a host of other things? Despite these problems,
don’t we know some history?

22. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history - What is it?
In History, the historian has to filter information, looking for the relevant facts.
What are the problems inherent in this? Doesn’t this filtering depend on the
historian? The historian’s culture? a host of other things?
Arnold Toynbee: Brilliant British historian or
culturally biased, dead, white guy?

23. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history - What is it?
In History, the historian has to filter information, looking for the relevant facts.
What are the problems inherent in this? Doesn’t this filtering depend on the
historian? The historian’s culture? a host of other things?
Probably both

24. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history - What is it?
In History, the historian has to filter information, looking for the relevant facts.
What are the problems inherent in this? Doesn’t this filtering depend on the
historian? The historian’s culture? a host of other things?
He is known for radically changing his views (i.e. on
Greece/Turkey, pro/anti-zionism) based on
argument, evidence and the persuasion of others.

25. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection

26. The Areas of Knowledge
Using history and at least one other area of knowledge,
examine the claim that it is possible to attain knowledge
despite problems of bias and selection

27. The Areas of Knowledge
You must choose another aok

28. The Areas of Knowledge
Natural Science?

29. The Areas of Knowledge
Less biased than history?
Natural Science?

30. The Areas of Knowledge
Less biased than history?
Natural Science?
Yes?

31. The Areas of Knowledge
Less biased than history?
Natural Science?
Yes? No?

32. The Areas of Knowledge
Less biased than history?
Natural Science?
Yes? No?
Why?

33. The Areas of Knowledge
Human Sciences?

34. The Areas of Knowledge
Human Sciences?
Yanomamo

35. The Areas of Knowledge
Human Sciences?
Yanomamo -the mirror of other’s dreams?

36. The Areas of Knowledge
While we’re at it...make sure you define your Areas
of knowledge here (i.e. history) but personalize the
definition don’t just webster dictionary-slap your
reader.

37. A Worker Reads History by Bertolt Brecht
Who built the seven gates of Thebes?
The books are filled with names of kings.
Was it the kings who hauled the craggy blocks of stone?
And Babylon, so many times destroyed.
Who built the city up each time? In which of Lima's houses,
That city glittering with gold, lived those who built it?
In the evening when the Chinese wall was finished
Where did the masons go? Imperial Rome
Is full of arcs of triumph. Who reared them up? Over whom
Did the Caesars triumph? Byzantium lives in song.
Were all her dwellings palaces? And even in Atlantis of the legend
The night the seas rushed in,
The drowning men still bellowed for their slaves.
Young Alexander conquered India.
He alone?
Caesar beat the Gauls.
Was there not even a cook in his army?
Phillip of Spain wept as his fleet
was sunk and destroyed. Were there no other tears?
Frederick the Greek triumphed in the Seven Years War.
Who triumphed with him?
Each page a victory
At whose expense the victory ball?
Every ten years a great man,
Who paid the piper?
So many particulars.
So many questions.

38. A Worker Reads History by Bertolt Brecht
Do history books leave out the whole truth? As history has changed/evolved?,
history has concerned itself more with the unexplored details. The daily life of
the little guy has become a major focus of history study but we still know
about Caesar.

39. consider again the
Command Term

40. consider again the
Command Term
Examine

41. consider again the
Command Term
Examine
To consider an argument or concept in a way that uncovers the assumptions and interrelationships of the issue..

42. consider again the
Command Term
Examine
To consider an argument or concept in a way that uncovers the assumptions and interrelationships of the issue.
From here you might have a conclusion of your
own. Basically, yes you can gain knowledge despite
bias or no you can’t. Even better: yes you can
but..... or no you can’t but.....

43. A Final Thought
consider the implications of three popular theories of truth
•The Correspondence Theory of Truth
•The Coherence Theory of Truth
•The Pragmatic Theory of Truth

44. The Correspondence Theory of Truth:
The Correspondence Theory of Truth is probably the most common and widespread way of understanding the
nature of truth and falsehood. Put quite simply, the Correspondence Theory argues that “truth” is whatever
corresponds to reality. An idea which corresponds with reality is true while an idea which does not correspond
with reality is false.
It is important to note here that “truth” is not a property of “facts.” This may seem odd at first, but a distinction
is being made here between facts and beliefs. A fact is some set of circumstances in the world while a belief is
an opinion about those what those facts are. A fact cannot be either true or false, it simply is because that is
the way the world is. A belief, however, is capable of being true or false because it may or may not accurately
describe the world.
Under the Correspondence Theory of Truth, the reason why we label certain beliefs as “true” is because they
correspond to those facts about the world. Thus, the belief that the sky is blue is a “true” belief because of the
fact that the sky is blue. Along with beliefs, we can count statements, propositions, sentences, etc. as capable
of being true or false.

45. The Coherence Theory of Truth:
The Coherence Theory of truth is probably second in popularity to the Correspondence Theory even
though it often seems to be an accurate description of how our conception of truth actually works. Put
simply: a belief is true when we are able to incorporate it in an orderly and logical manner into a larger and
complex system of beliefs or, even more simply still, a belief is true when it fits in with the set of all our
other beliefs without creating a contradiction.
Sometimes this seems like an odd way to actually describe truth. After all, a belief can be an inaccurate
description of reality and fit in with a larger, complex system of further inaccurate descriptions of reality,
according to the Coherence Theory, that inaccurate belief would still be called “truth” even though it didn’t
actually describe the way the world really was. Does that really make any sense?
Well, possibly … the reason is because statements can’t really be verified in isolation. Whenever you test
an idea, you are also actually testing a whole set of ideas at the same time. For example, when you pick
up a ball in your hand and drop it, it isn’t simply our belief about gravity which is tested but also our beliefs
about a host of other things, not least of which would be the accuracy of our visual perception.
Because of this, the Coherence Theory does manage to capture something important about the way we
actually conceive of truth in our daily lives. It isn’t that unusual to dismiss something as false precisely
because it fails to cohere with a system of ideas which we are confident are true. Granted, maybe the
system we assume to be true is quite a way off the mark, but so long as it continues to be successful and
is capable of slight adjustments in the light of new data, our confidence is reasonable.

46. The Pragmatic Theory of Truth:
The Pragmatic Theory of truth determines whether or not a belief is true or not based on whether it has a
useful (pragmatic) application in the world. If it does not, then it is not true. As with Coherence Theory, truth in
this sense is nothing to do with the way the world ‘really is’ but is just a function of whether an idea can be
used as a model to make useful predictions about what is going to happen in the world. As a result pragmatic
truths can only be learnt through interaction with the world: we don’t discover truth by sitting alone in a room
and thinking about it.
There are, of course, a number of obvious objections that can be raised against the Pragmatic Theory of
Truth. For one thing, the notion of “what works” is very ambiguous. What happens when a belief works in one
sense, but fails in another? For example, a belief that one will succeed may give a person the psychological
strength needed to accomplish a great deal but in the end, they may fail in their ultimate goal. Was their belief
“true”?
Furthermore, when a belief “works” in this sense, why call it “true”? Why not call it something like “useful”? A
useful belief is not necessarily the same as a true belief and, what’s worse, is that people don’t typically use
the word “true” in normal conversation to mean useful. For example, for the average person, the statement “It
is useful to believe that my spouse is faithful” does not at all mean the same as “It is true that my spouse is
faithful.” Granted, it may be the case that true beliefs are also usually the ones that are useful, but not always.
As Nietzsche argued, sometimes untruth may be more useful than truth.
Now, pragmatism may be a handy means for distinguishing truth from untruth. After all, that which is true
should produce predictable consequences for us in our lives. In order to determine what is real and what is
unreal, it would not be unreasonable to focus primarily upon that which works. This, however, is not quite the
same as the Pragmatic Theory of Truth.