Scaffolded TOK essay planning template

TOK prescribed title:
3. Does it matter if our acquisition of
knowledge happens in “bubbles” where some
information and voices are excluded?
Possible knowledge claims and knowledge
questions:
In general:
To what extent does limited perspectives
hinder knowledge acquisition?
Are information bubbles inevitable/always
present?
Can having more opinions aid in the search
of the truth?
Is it always best to have all voices and
information available?
What counts as “information bubbles”? (does voices/information?
country-wide censorship, or excluding
concepts widely believed to be obsolete or
incorrect still count?)
Relating to “some voices and information”:
To what extent should voices and information voices/information? Is this welcomed?
be censored/filtered?
How do we determine what views/information
should be excluded? Should any information
be excluded?
Is it possible to not exclude any voices and
information in the acquisition of knowledge?
What does this title ask you to discuss? How
will you go about approaching the question?
Determine if learning in an environment
where not all opinions/information can be
accessed has a significant impact.
I will discuss how limited perspectives can aid
and hinder knowledge acquisition depending
on the circumstances. I will also examine if
more voices and information will always help
to find the truth.
Then, I’ll talk about the extent and the ways
be which information and voices are excluded
in social media, the internet, and censorship
and how echo chambers are created. This
leads to the questions: should information be
excluded? Is it possible to not exclude any
Finally, I’ll discuss the effects of learning in an
bubble and the role that authority plays in the
filtering of knowledge. Also, I want to bring up
the responsibilities people have: are they
responsible to inform others of the excluded

Relating to “our acquisition of knowledge”:

If people are able to choose what information
they wish to exclude, what effect does this
have? What if it is decided for them?
If a person chooses to only accept a portion
of the information available (only those that fit
their beliefs/they believe to be true), should
others give them alternative perspectives?
How do authority/experts affect the
acceptance of different views?
Which knowledge questions have you selected and why? Explain/show how they will
contribute to the development of the discussion.
To what extent does limited perspectives hinder knowledge acquisition?
This is the question my discussion will center around. After examining the aspects of
perspectives and knowledge acquisition, I will come back to answer this in the
conclusion.

Does having more perspectives aid in the search of the truth?

This question is about the benefits that more perspectives can bring, and why having
a wide range of perspective is generally considered to be better. Is it actually more
beneficial to have more voices heard?

What counts as “information bubbles”? (does country-wide censorship, or excluding concepts

widely believed to be obsolete or incorrect still count?)
Before I talk about the impacts of being inside an information bubble, I want to define
what is an information bubble and if country-wide censorship count.

How do we determine what views/information should be excluded? Should any information be

excluded?
This links to the previous question and discusses the scenarios in which information
can be excluded and if they should be excluded.

If a person chooses to only accept a portion of the information available (only those that fit
their beliefs/they believe to be true), should others give them alternative perspectives?
This concerns the responsibility we have to pull others out of an echo chamber/
information bubble. Should we expose them to alternative perspectives?

How do authority/experts affect the acceptance of different views?

Information that experts agree on being true is more mainstream, and sometimes the
“incorrect” ideas are discarded. Also, authority can decide what information goes
against their goals and prevent that from being published.

Which areas of knowledge/ways of knowing will be included in your discussion? Explain how
they will contribute to the development of the discussion.

AOKs
natural sciences, human science

Natural sciences: having incomplete/ not up to date information can impact one’s learning,
and they may make to incorrect conclusions/not see all perspectives on an issue.

Human sciences: mostly politics, where echo chambers are formed for political beliefs and
opposing opinions are excluded on the internet.
List and explain your real-life examples. How and why have you selected them? How will they
contribute to the development of the discussion?

-People are usually not aware that they are in an information bubble, so their awareness of
this exclusion might not impact their learning , since everyone is somewhat equally in a
bubble.

Example: government censorship  everyone in that country don’t have access to

some knowledge, many may not realize the extent of censorship or what information
is kept away from them

Example: political bubbles where only similar political opinions and information ex.
news that support this view are shown  only acquires some knowledge

How do we know what knowledge is excluded, if we can’t access them?

Will people in political echo chambers on social media benefit from seeing other
perspectives?

-Purpose of information bubble: consciously created?

Example: social media bubbles created by extremist groups to convert more people to
the same beliefs. These bubbles are consciously created so new members become
exposed only to certain views.

-Can information bubbles be avoided/eliminated?

Example: internet browsers and social media, even if someone is aware that the posts
shown are selected to fit their interests, they will have difficulty getting completely
impartial results and information (echo chambers)

Maybe:

-All information should be made available: some information not understandable by general
public misunderstandings

-How do we know that we aren’t excluding valid voices? Who gets to decide this?
What are the counter-claims and different perspectives to your discussion? Show how you
will consider these in your discussion.

-Assumption: The degree of exclusion of voices/information is the only factor impacting

acquisition of knowledge in a “bubble”

Other variables affecting acquisition of knowledge

-People’s awareness of this exclusion can impact learning : if they know that their
knowledge is incomplete or if they believe that they are seeing all of the perspectives

-Whether this exclusion is voluntary or involuntary: voluntary, person doesn’t want to

see the excluded perspectives and information; involuntary, the person might
want/wonder about the information they can’t access.

-Assumption: voices and information constitute knowledge

-external voices and information make up a lot of knowledge, but some knowledge is
created individually (interpretations, opinions, etc)

-Assumption: This exclusion still allows learners to acquire knowledge

-what if so much information is excluded that an entire portion of knowledge is

missing? Learners won’t be able to learn anything in that topic then and “knowledge
acquisition” wouldn’t exist.

What conclusions have you reached about your knowledge question(s)? What are the
implications of this conclusion?

Yes, it matters that some voices and information are excluded to one’s acquisition of
knowledge. This exclusion can have both positive and negative effects, and sometimes not
having all the information is better/less harmful. However, it is difficult to determine and filter
harmful information without creating an information bubble and limiting perspectives.

What are my academic honesty requirements for this essay? List the references below that
require citation or checking.

I will cite any sources I use. I will look at some journals for more specific examples.