RLS 5 (Feb. 6)

[ST. JOHN]

This week's posters: Sierra G., Justin, Maya, Marthine, Christine, Rebecca Farley, Chris, Savonte, Khalyla

Post a real-life situation that somehow addresses the prescribed title you have chosen.  In a few sentences, explain how it relates to your PT.  *You do not have to post a RLS that you will actually use in your essay.*

Everyone else, choose one of the RLSs from the people above and describe how it relates to your own PT.

Posters, reply directly to this message.  All others, reply directly to the individual whose RLS you are addressing.

Original posts due by midnight Saturday.  All replies due by midnight Wednesday.

[ChristineJones8]

One of the most controversial topic in the US today is the subject of whether or not the judicial system should enforce the death penalty. The major question here is whether it is right or wrong for someone to take the life of another as punishment for a crime. Those against are swayed by the concept that it Is beyond our rights to end the life of someone, there fore the death penalty is wrong. However other argue in a more 'eye for an eye' mentality. This controversy relates to the PT: how to the concepts that we use help us to construct knowledge?

 The 'knowledge' in this case is whether or not the death penalty is ethical.

[JustinHendee5th]

I've decided to go for more of an everyday kinda RLS. I'm sure atleast some students here have either seen someone attempt/have attempted to hook up a television so that it works. Most times I have watched or tried to, the set-up manual was non-existent until absolutely necessary. It was just simpler without having to use the manual and go through the tedious process of ACTUALLY reading it when we could just try to problem solve where which wires should go where. But inevitably, after awhile, the manual must be consulted. Reading the manual makes the process of setting up the TV a lot more accurate than we could have done ourselves.

This RLS relates to PT#6 :" "In Knowledge, there is a trade-off between simplicity and accuracy." Evaluate this statement", because it illustrates that exact statement. Without instructions, the process is not very accurate, but in taking time to go through step by step, the set-up process becomes much more accurate than it would have been.

[SierraGray5]

Last summer on May 30, 2015, a report was released from NASA stating that there were trace amounts of THC found on a meteorite fragment that had been recovered from a desert in Nevada (way back in 2010). Interestingly enough, in the scientific community there was a lot of backlash and demands for evidence that complies with the ongoing war on drugs.

http://worldnewsdailyreport.com/meteorite-fragment-contains-trace-amounts-of-thc-claims-nasa-expert/

In terms of the TOK essay questions, this RLS can be applied to prescribed title #6 (“In knowledge there is always a trade-off between accuracy and simplicity.” Evaluate this statement in relation to two areas of knowledge.) In terms of natural science, there is a trade off between the two due to the complex testing and evaluation that was used to determine the chemical structure of the meteorite. If you take a look at the response to the findings you then are entering the real of human sciences in which you discover that emotions (presumably in place due to the war on drugs) overtook reason when other scientists were asking for proof and re-testing, in this case there is no complexity for the motives are quite simple. 

[LindseyStanley8]

This RLS can be related to my PT that states : "'Knowledge within a discipline develops according to the principles of natural selection.'  How useful is this metaphor?"  Because the new discovery could have further implications on what scientists believe about the relationship between space and life on earth, the new knowledge has the potential to disprove previous beliefs.  Therefore, according to the concept of "survival of the fittest" and its relation to natural selection, the previous knowledge would not survive in the context of the new discovery.