TOK Advanced Concepts & Applications

Front

Justified True Belief (JTB) vs. The Gettier Problem

Back

JTB defines knowledge as a belief that is true and justified. The Gettier Problem challenges this by presenting cases where a belief is true and justified, but the truth relies on luck or false premises rather than the justification itself. In TOK, this illustrates that the 'nature of knowledge' is more complex than simple possession of truth.

Front

Second-Order Knowledge Questions (KQs)

Back

Unlike first-order questions (which focus on specific content within a discipline, e.g., 'What is the boiling point of water?'), second-order KQs are about knowledge itself (e.g., 'How does the scientific method ensure the reliability of empirical claims?'). TOK specifically requires second-order thinking that reflects on the methodology, scope, and validity of knowledge production.

Front

The Map Analogy in TOK

Back

This metaphor posits that 'the map is not the territory.' It suggests that knowledge representations (maps, models, theories) are simplifications of reality (the territory) that serve specific purposes. While useful for navigation and understanding, all maps involve abstraction, selection, and therefore omission of detail. This highlights the limitation and scope of knowledge frameworks.

Front

Coherentism vs. Foundationalism

Back

Two theories regarding the structure of justification. Foundationalism claims knowledge rests on basic, self-justifying beliefs (infinitely regressing to a 'foundation'). Coherentism argues beliefs are justified by their mutual coherence and logical consistency within a web of beliefs, rather than a single starting point. In TOK, this debates whether we look for 'axioms' or systemic consistency.

Front

Falsification (Karl Popper)

Back

The principle that scientific theories cannot be proven true (because induction is logically limited), but they can be proven false. A single black swan falsifies 'all swans are white.' For TOK, this shifts the scientific goal from verification to seeking robust tests that could disprove a theory, distinguishing science from pseudoscience which explains away contrary evidence.