Object assessment rough draft

How might the context in which knowledge is presented influence whether it is accepted or
rejected?

The context of transferring knowledge has a significant role in its success. One way to
approach this question is to determine the context of who and how the knowledge is
presented. By whom dictates authority and how it is presented, through evidence can affect it is
it rejected/accepted. This then creates the formula for reliability through authority and evidence.
The authority and position of the presenter also play a crucial role; one must have a great
historical background on the subject of knowledge and have one of the three roles of authority:
traditional, charismatic, or rational legal authority. When the individual or group has an authority,
they are seen to have expertise in the subject which establishes credibility. Then, how the
knowledge is presented also increase reliability, one must take the audience into consideration
to make perfect of how the presentation goes, by using appropriate diction and tone, have clear
premises, and appeal to the emotions of the listeners to have a higher rate of success in their
coercion. The object I have chosen is my biology book for the IBDP program. This book has no
credibility to the students of IB. It only gained its reliability because the school provided it, giving
an authoritative reliability from the school and curriculum. Then it is given in the context for IBDP
classes, and therefore students rely on it and accept the knowledge from the book for their IBDP
years. If we were to switch the situation of this book, that it is given by an IGCSE school for the
IBDP curriculum, the receiver would greatly doubt if they could use the contents for IBDP rather
than IGCSE. This then proves that who and how a subject is given, provides credibility for
others to either accept or reject the knowledge presented. Even something as simple as a book,
requires the formula of reliability. All in all, the success of transferring knowledge requires many
various factors, such as the evidence provided, the authority of the presenter that ensures
trustworthiness and reliability, and the way it is presented.
Answer 2
As humans, emotions, moods, are unavoidable that make us a conscious living, the capability
for emotion can be viewed as a positive aspect as it allows the ability for complex reasoning,
however it may also prevent us from comprehending and make a decision objectively. Thus,
our contemporary state of emotion can then affect whether we are willing to open
ourselves to accepting or rejecting the knowledge. As theorized by the Schather two factor
theory, emotions derive from our cognitive processes, and act as a physiological expressive
response to a situation that causes an emotion; for instance, the individual feels the emotions of
worn outness, they are more likely to reject the knowledge given, as it is a physiological
response to maintain balance and prevent their selves to be overworked further. On the
contrary, if the individual is emotionally happy and motivated, it makes them more willing to
open to new ideas. The object chosen is my timer that is running out of time. This reflects the
situation of someone choking under pressure, for instance in a test. This situation reflects the
emotion of anxiety, which then may have the possibility for the individual to do worse. Just like
this situation, an individual can more likely block the teachings of a teacher in the current class if
their next one is an exam. As the individual is undergoing anxiety and fear, their mind cannot
process the knowledge presented to them, causing them to reject the knowledge due to anxiety.
In conclusion, the emotions and feelings humans undergo have a significant impact on the way
we process external information, just like the theory of Schather's two factors suggests, our
emotions are closely tied to our cognitive processes and can influence our decision-making.

Answer 3
Another way to answer the question is through using the foundational theory of Praxeology;
Praxeology theorizes how human action is defined as purposeful behavior. Where we act, think,
process knowledge that has a purpose to ourselves; thus, the context of what we accept/reject
is through the imperativeness of the knowledge that has an effect on our own self-interest
and desire. The theory was first derived by Ludwig Von Mises, Mises studies human action
based on decision making. To support the study of praxeology, egocentrism behavior reflects
this idea, as some individuals have a higher stronger desire compared to others, that it creates
an extreme form of selfishness, which then affect people like these to accept knowledge that is
not correlating with their self’s. Not only purpose and goals, but one might also accept the
knowledge only if it aligns with their own values and culture. In my own family, we also proved
the praxeology theory, where we only accept and learn about new medicine that has a purpose
for ourselves that also aligns with our beliefs. Praxeology gives a theory on why we are more
likely to be accepting or rejecting knowledge that aligns with our own self-interest, how we only
surround ourselves with knowledge that supports our initial culture or values. In conclusion, we
do tend to be bias if the context of knowledge does not align with our own initial beliefs and
desire. This then can affect the way we view things, the ability to diversify ourselves to new
different knowledge, comprehending it… will make the decision of rejecting or accepting can
make us more objective in the ways we view life.
‌