The Theory of Knowledge Essay

Your theory of knowledge essay for examination must be written on one of the six titles
(questions) provided below. You may choose any title, but must consult with your teacher
according to the timeline provided below. Your essay will be marked according to the
assessment instrument published in the theory of knowledge guide also copied below.

Prescribed Titles:

1. “Accepting knowledge claims always involves an element of trust.” Discuss this claim with reference
to two areas of knowledge.

2. Within areas of knowledge, how can we differentiate between change and progress? Answer with
reference to two areas of knowledge.

3. “Labels are a necessity in the organization of knowledge, but they also constrain our
understanding.” Discuss this statement with reference to two areas of knowledge.

4. “Statistics conceal as much as they reveal.” Discuss this claim with reference to two areas of
knowledge.

5. “Areas of knowledge are most useful in combination with each other.” Discuss this claim with
reference to two areas of knowledge.

6. “Avoiding bias seems a commendable goal, but this fails to recognize the positive role that bias can
play in the pursuit of knowledge.” Discuss this statement with reference to two areas of knowledge.

IBO Instructions to candidates:

The focus of your essay should be on knowledge questions. Where appropriate, refer to other parts of your IB
programme and to your experiences as a knower.

Always justify your statements and provide relevant examples to illustrate your arguments.

Pay attention to the implications of your arguments, and remember to consider what can be said against them. If
you use external sources, cite them according to a recognized convention.
Note that statements in quotations in these titles are not necessarily authentic: they present a real point of view but
may not be direct quotes. It is appropriate to analyse them but it is unnecessary, even unwise, to spend time on
researching a context for them.

Examiners mark essays against the title as set. Respond to the title exactly as given; do not alter it in any way.

Your essay must have a maximum of 1600 words.

Theory of Knowledge – Essay

Title Discussion
Title Choice and Exploration due Nov 6
1. Write out your prescribed topic here: (Highlight the key terms in the topic)

“Accepting knowledge claims always involves an element of trust.” Discuss this claim with
reference to two areas of knowledge.

(1st Interaction with Teacher 10 minutes)

2. Introduction –
a. Show an understanding of the Prescribed Title by a restatement of the question.
How is trust always incorporated in the accepting production of knowledge claims, To what extent
does trust have in the production of knowledge and discovered theories?

Explain the key terms in your own words (No dictionary meanings)
Trust is having faith or relying on someone/something/some theory. E.g. Trust can mean having
faith in someone like the “faith test” where you drop back relying on your friend to hold you, this
can count as having trust on someone.

Always is when a certain thing/the thing being stated happens on every possible occasion. For
example how gravity always plays a role in our life.

Accepting is when someone agrees to the statement or theory being stated by the other person.
But each person accepting have a different criteria of acceptance. For example scientist in
accepting theories require experiments to be conducted compared to being a certified driver in
the community you need to take a driving test to acquire a driving license to be accepted as a
certified driver in the community.

b. What are the new and specific knowledge questions implied in the title? Come up with
at least two by identifying implications and underlying assumptions.
(1) How do we define trust?

(2) Is trust formulated right away with new knowledge claims provided or is there a procedure
people follow through to gain trust on the new knowledge claim provided?

(3) Does the definition of trust change from one AOK to another or by the perception of the
knower?

c. What is the thesis of this essay? (Plan of action and take a position on the prescribed
title)
I will explore or investigate two AOK’s, natural science and mathematics. I will justify how trust is
an important element in accepting knowledge claims. For example, Albert Einstein’s e=mc^2
theory/claim in physics, Einstein’s theory was not just developed through thin air and was not just
developed by Albert Einstein himself, he needed help of Annalen der physik, which is a scientific
journal which published Einstien’s work. Einstein need to gain trust of his publishers of the
Annalen der physik, he did that by describing the relation between his formula of e=mc^2 in his
fourth paper of Annus mirabilis. Later on, MIT group led by David Pritchard and NIST/ILL
collaboration to prove his theory by experimenting it. For mathematics trust is the concept which
all mathematicians use, and we use to do maths. Trusting our ability to work out a question or a
world problem in maths is a perfect example of how trust is incorporated in maths. However
maths has many uncertainties, for example in making mistakes in a equation or the calculation so
sometimes people may use outside sources to justify if their work is correct. For example, the
Pythagoras theorem, a basic equation we use to find the perimeters of a triangle. We know this
equation is reliable and we have “trust” in this equation however there are still doubts for
example doubts in calculation or even writing the Pythagoras theorem or doubts on getting the
answer wrong. Hence, I will use these examples from the AOK’s I have chosen to justify that trust
is an element that is always involved in knowledge claims.

1) Do these methods incorporate the element of trust in their knowledge claim?

2) Do all knowledge claim acceptance incorporate the element of trust or is there sometimes
some other factor like doubt involved in claiming the knowledge?

d. Which Areas of Knowledge can you use in the essay?

Natural Sciences, Mathematics, Human sciences basically all the aoks

3. What Areas of Knowledge can I discuss? 

(1) Natural sciences

(2) Mathematics

4. List real- life specific examples you can use to help support your new knowledge question.

- E=mc^2 discovery by Albert Einstein

- Pythagoras theorem (a^2 +b^2 = c^2)

Use two sets of claims and counterclaims for each of the two AOKs you’ve listed above. (Explore
the perspective or assumptions of these claims)

AOK 1:

First Claim within this AOK: The element of trust is always involved in acceptance of knowledge
claims by the form of mathematics in natural science.
 Example supporting claim: The experiment conducted to prove e=mc^2 theory by Albert
Einstein and how Einstein influenced them and made them trust his knowledge claim thus leading
them to conduct the experiment and help him prove his knowledge claim.

Analysis relating to example: e=mc^2 was officially published on September 27, 1905. It was
published in the journal Annalen der Physik with the title of “Does the inertia of Body Depend
upon its Energy Content?”. In this he described the interchangeable nature of mass and energy or
known as the equation e=mc^2. Before the publishment Einstein needed help in proving the
theory/knowledge claim and a publisher hence, he gained trust of the editors of Annalen der
physik to post his work of four pages called “The Annus Mirabilis papers.”

Counterclaim: “on the other hand,…” or

On the other hand, the trust in the knowledge claim of Einstein still created uncertainty or a
doubt in belief of e=mc^2. As there was no proper experiment conducted in 1905 justifying this
knowledge claim.

Example supporting counterclaim:

I will use the MIT group led by David Pritchard and NIST/ILL collaboration who conducted the
knowledge claim e=mc^2 by Einstein experimentally in 2005.

Analysis relating claim and counterclaim to the prompt

In the claim I explained/justified about how element of trust played a big part of the discovery and
knowledge claim of e=mc^2. In the counter claim however I stated that different perspectives
might not fully trust the knowledge claim stated by Einstein. As their “acceptance” criteria is
different than compared to Annalen der physik editors. Thus, leading to uncertainty and doubt.

Links used:
- https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2005/12/einstein-was-right-again-experiments-
confirm-e-mc2
- https://earthsky.org/human-world/this-date-in-science-emc2/#:~:text=Bottom%20line
%3A%20On%20September%2027,%2C%20or%20E%3Dmc2.
- https://www.nist.gov/news-events/news/2005/12/einstein-was-right-again-experiments-
confirm-e-mc2

Second Claim within this AOK: The element of trust is always involved in acceptance of knowledge
claims using scientific languages and methods in natural science.

Example supporting claim: The cell theory (modern)

Analysis relating to example: The modern cell theory was the development of the proposed cell
theory of Theodor Schwann in 1839. However, as technology advanced there were changes in the
cell theory hence leading to the modern cell theory. The use of scientific terminology in the cell
theory and the experiments to justify the cell theory, thus, gained the trust of the science
community and is now involved in the modern cell theory. For example, Matthias Schleiden
observed that all plants were made of cells hence changed the old cell theory as now in the modern
cell theory.

Counterclaim: However, the usage of scientific languages and methods in natural science
doesn’t always lead to the “trust” element being involved in acceptance of knowledge.

Example supporting counterclaim: Statistical Data/Quantitative Data

Analysis relating claim and counterclaim to the prompt

First, I used the example of cell theory to justify that the element of trust is always involved in
acceptance of knowledge claims using scientific languages and methods in natural science and
then my counter claim is that the usage of scientific languages and methods in natural science
doesn’t always lead to the “trust” element being involved in acceptance of knowledge as
statistical data factually proves that the statement being stated is correct. There is no debate or
doubt as their factual proof. This is used in all the three natural sciences “chemistry, physics and
biology. In biology statistical data is collected by conducting experiments related to the
knowledge claim.

Links:
- https://www.nationalgeographic.org/article/history-cell-discovering-cell/

AOK 2:

First Claim within this AOK: The element of trust is always involved in acceptance of knowledge
claims in mathematics.

Example supporting claim: Pythagoras theorem

Analysis relating to example: Founded by Greek mathematician philosopher Pythagoras in

around 490 bce. Pythagoras theorem one of the most important and commonly used formulas in
the world. This formula is trusted by many mathematicians, students and architectures.

Counterclaim: The element trust is not always in accepting a knowledge claim. There are
different factors such as awareness and understanding in accepting a knowledge claim.

Example supporting counterclaim: Conditions when Pythagoras theorem not valid. E.g. If two
sides of a triangle are not commensurable.

Analysis relating claim and counterclaim to the prompt

First, I stated how Pythagoras theorem is commonly used around the world as it is one of the
fundamentals in geometry and is trusted by many people in the world for their work/jobs. Hence
proving, the element of trust is always involved in acceptance of knowledge claims in
mathematics, as Pythagoras theorem is related to geometry which is a concept/topic in
mathematics. The counterclaim states that the element trust is not always in accepting a
knowledge claim. There are different factors such as awareness and understanding in accepting a
knowledge claim. As there are conditions when Pythagoras theorem not valid and blindly
following the theorem without knowing its flaws might lead to wrong calculations. Hence, needing
to understand and be aware of the flaws is important to accept the knowledge claim (Pythagoras
theorem)
Links used:
- https://sciencing.com/real-life-uses-pythagorean-theorem-
8247514.html#:~:text=Architecture%20and%20Construction,or%20other%20physical
%20construction%20projects.
- https://www.britannica.com/science/Pythagorean-theorem#:~:text=Although%20the
%20theorem%20has%20long,it%20is%20actually%20far%20older.
- https://medium.com/@TheDreamWeaver/a-major-flaw-in-the-pythagorean-theorem-
6d021604e9fe

Second Claim within this AOK: The element of trust is always involved in acceptance of
mathematical resources in mathematics.

Example supporting claim: Khan academy

Analysis relating to example: Khan Academy is an American non-profit educational

organization created in 2006 by Sal Khan, with the goal of creating a set of online tools that
help educate students. Khan academy is widely known and is a reliable source where students
individually learn confusing mathematics concepts by the help of online videos posted by
Khan Academy outside class time.

Counterclaim: The element of trust is not always involved in acceptance of mathematical

resources in mathematics.

Example supporting counterclaim: Some mathematical resources (Khan academy) could be

assigned by a teacher to use for mathematical help to the students. So, from the students’
perspective there is no factor of “trust” involved in the mathematical resource given. Sometimes
there can be a factor of doubt or uncertainty in student’s knowledge of the concept taught so that
might urge them to accept the knowledge claim (mathematical resources e.g. Khan Academy)

Analysis relating claim and counterclaim to the prompt

I have stated the claim by the support of an example of khan academy. I have given a counter
claim by using the same example and perspective but change the circumstance or situation that
the certain student was in.
Links used:
https://www.khanacademy.org/

TOK Essay Planning Document Due (Internal Summative) Date -

5. Conclusion – Determine the main implications of the arguments.

Yes, accepting a knowledge claim involves an element of trust but not always. I have stated this
using the 2 AOKs which are mathematics and natural science. Each having different “acceptance”
criteria however resulting in the statement that the element trust is not always involved in the
acceptance of a knowledge claim.
Show why the original stand in the introduction is valid.
Now we know that trust is an acceptance of a knowledge claim provided. We can see that trust is
not formulated right away as e=mc^2 of Albert Einstein took time to publish and Einstein had to
first make his paper trustworthy to gain trust for the publishment. We also know that the
definition of trust does change from AOKs or by the perception of knower as different AOKs have
different acceptance criteria of “trust” for example I stated natural science need experimental
 data and mathematics need quantitative/calculative data which are two different criteria of
acceptance. We also know that even though “trust” is not always involved in acceptance of
knowledge there are different factors influencing for different AOKs for example, natural science,
e=mc^2 didn’t have an experiment so the uncertainty and doubt motivated people to justify this
concept so they conducted an experiment, hence, the acceptance of the concept/theory. In
mathematics the use of understanding and awareness in the flaws of the Pythagoras theorem
instead of the element “trust”.

2nd interaction with teacher (to present development of Ideas)

Begin work to turn your outline into your draft essay

Draft is due on
3rd Interaction with Teacher (to discuss Final Draft)
Screen reader support enabled.
Continue work on your essay during break.

Essay Due Jan 20. (3rd interaction with teacher)

Generate Turnitin Report and Submit Final Draft for Submission to the IB
 
 
 

Theory of Knowledge - Draft Planning and Progress Form:

Completion of this form The completion of this form by each candidate and their teacher for theory of knowledge is a
mandatory requirement. This will strengthen the process of writing the essay and support the authenticity of a candidate's
work. Each completed form must be submitted to the IB, but will not be marked.
Candidate This form must be completed during the planning and progress of your essay. It is a record of three interactions
with your teacher. This will allow you to create a plan for the structure of your essay.
Teacher You must have at least three interactions with each candidate; one early on in the process to discuss the prescribed
titles, an interim session to discuss progress and a final session at which the candidate should present a full draft. Other
interactions are permitted, but only these three should be recorded on this form.

Prescribed title: (Copy paste your title from above)

Planning and Candidate's comments

Date
progress You are advised to include your comments soon after each interaction
The first interaction should focus on discussing the prescribed titles and choosing the title for
your essay.

First interaction:
Feedback on the plan
 In your second interaction you should discuss the development of your ideas in relation to
your chosen title, and you may present to your teacher an exploration of those ideas in some
written form.
Second interaction:
Feedback on the
Draft

For your final interaction you are encouraged to present to your teacher a full draft of your
essay. The teacher is permitted to provide written comments on your draft, but will not mark
or edit your draft.
Third interaction:
Feedback on the
Turnitin Report

Teacher's comments:

Note: The TK/PPF is not seen by the examiner when they are marking student essays. It is submitted to the
IB and is referred to in cases where there are concerns about academic malpractice or concerns about the
preparation of students for the TOK assessment tasks. 
The TK/PPF has two key purposes:
1. To help ensure that students around the world are getting a similar level of help and support with
their TOK essays by specifying three required interactions between teachers and students.
  2. To help ensure that the essay is the student’s own work. 

Page 2 / 2

Theory of Knowledge Essay – Assessment Instrument

Understanding the TOK essay assessment instrument -
The assessment of the TOK essay is underpinned by the driving question: does the student provide a clear,
coherent and critical exploration of the essay title? 
The assessment instrument then provides five levels of performance. These levels are to be seen as holistic
descriptors rather than as a checklist of necessary characteristics and it is not necessary for every single
aspect of a level descriptor to be met for a mark in that level to be awarded.

 “A sustained focus on the title”

The TOK essay is an exploration of the chosen title, so ensuring that the essay is tightly focused on the title
is crucial. If this doesn’t happen, the essay will be seen to lack relevance and will only achieve low marks.
Does the student provide a clear, coherent and critical exploration of the essay title?
Excellent Good Satisfactory Basic Rudimentary 0
9-10 7-8 5-6 3-4 1-2
 The discussion The discussion The discussion The discussion is The discussion
The discussion
has a sustained is focused on is focused on connected to the is weakly does not reach
focus on the the title and is the title and is title and makes connected to
the standard
title and is linked developed with superficial or the title. described by
linked effectively to some links to limited links to
While there may the other levels
effectively to areas of areas of areas of be links to the or is not a
areas of knowledge. knowledge. knowledge. areas of response to one
knowledge. Arguments are Arguments are The discussion is knowledge, any of the
Arguments are clear, coherent offered and are largely relevant points prescribed titles
clear, coherent and supported supported by descriptive. are descriptive for the correct
and effectively by examples. examples. Limited or consist only examination
supported by There is There is some arguments are of unsupported session.
specific awareness and awareness of offered but they assertions.
examples. The some different points are unclear and
implications of evaluation of of view. are not
arguments are different points supported by
considered. of view. effective
There is clear examples.
awareness and
evaluation of
different points
of view.

Possible characteristics
Insightful Pertinent Acceptable Underdeveloped Ineffective
Convincing Relevant Mainstream Basic Descriptive
Accomplished Analytical Adequate Superficial Incoherent
Lucid Organized Competent Limited Formless

Theory of Knowledge Essay – Additional Guidance

Common weaknesses seen in TOK essays: 
• They fail to address the title, or that they begin well but then deviate from the title. Strong TOK essays
retain a clear focus on the title throughout.
 • They focus on one part of the title but completely ignore another part of the title. Strong TOK essays
ensure that they address all parts of the title, as well as considering any assumptions that are written into
the title.
 • They fail to consider central terms and concepts used in the title, or alternatively where they simply
provide lengthy descriptive dictionary definitions of these terms. “Linked effectively to areas of
knowledge” 

The TOK prescribed essay titles may refer to specific areas of knowledge or they may ask students to
discuss a claim in relation to two areas of knowledge but leave the choice of areas of knowledge to the
student. In both question formats, it is vital that students make clear and effective links to areas of
knowledge in their essays. The term “area of knowledge” refers explicitly to the five areas of knowledge
listed in the TOK guide: history, natural sciences, human sciences, mathematics and the arts. 

Sometimes students may wish to use an example or discipline that does not fit comfortably into an area of
knowledge. While examiners are encouraged to be open to a variety of approaches, if a student takes this
approach then it does require them to offer some additional justification or explanation for why they are
using this example for that area of knowledge. It is therefore recommended that teachers advise their
students against this approach, as it requires the student to make the case for why that example or
discipline belongs to that particular area of knowledge.

 “Arguments are effectively supported by specific examples” The TOK essay requires students to undertake
a critical exploration of the chosen title. It is therefore crucial that the discussion is analytical rather than
simply descriptive and that students provide clear and coherent arguments that are supported by specific
examples. 

The term “specific examples” means that the student, for example, makes reference to a particular artist
or artwork or scientist or scientific theory rather than making a generic reference to “artists” or
“scientists”. The examples in a TOK essay play an important role in supporting the argument. This means
that it is not only the examples themselves that are important, but crucially also how they are used within
the essay to support the arguments that the student is making.

 A common weakness seen in TOK essays is where students use too many examples and/or skip from one
example to another without unpacking their relevance and significance and without showing how these
examples support the argument being made. This tends to make the essay overly descriptive rather than
analytical. “Clear awareness and evaluation of different points of view” 

The TOK essay should be a critical exploration rather than simply a one-sided statement of the student’s
own viewpoint or opinion. Although students are required to engage with different points of view, TOK
students should be encouraged to come to their own conclusions. They should be encouraged to make a
critical appraisal of different points of view and to be clear what their own position is; for example, they
might agree with a claim with reservations. Within an essay, different points of view might take the form of
claims and counterclaims or arguments and counterarguments.