An unofficial guide to the IB and its many horrors

Hi there. We’re not exactly so sure what your life situation is so we’ll just run through a structure with you. However, if you’re looking for a real life situation, you could definitely find something online about breast reconstruction following mastectomy/double mastectomy or lumpectomy with breast cancers?

Title example: Is it ever ethically justifiable to undergo cosmetic surgery? 

We could recommend that you use deontology and consequentialism with your arguments FOR and AGAINST. Therefore the structure would be:

Introduction. 

- definitions (of your ethics, sense perception, emotions or deontology, consequentialism etc)

- introduce your real life situation

- explain what the speech will present.

Argument one (deontology for example/or ethics) FOR!!

- include your real life situation and argue it in a way that it justifies cosmetic surgery 

- a good example may include someone who is otherwise seen to be entirely unattractive or was born with a defect that is not widely accepted in a ‘beautiful’ society (ie; cleft palate, burns as a child, cosmetic surgery involving breast reconstruction for uneven breasts etc).

- make sure that you put in a few statistics (find them online), revealing how numbers have been increasing in cosmetic surgery as more people find it available to them to enhance or rectify parts of their appearance that otherwise causes them damage (ie; causes them to self-harm, feel depressed or simply have low self confidence or image). 

- This allows you to explain that cosmetic surgery is doing good because we are all entitled to change ourselves should be we in a place that we feel unhappy with appearance features. This is also where you could bring in Kant’s principle, or deontology quotations that reveal choice about things. 

Maybe also involve make-up and tanning/push up bras and other alternative ways that we use = so is cosmetic a permanent solution to what we spend so much time trying to do with other objects? 

- THEN bring in your counter. Maybe reveal that while this seems justifiable, shouldn’t we just use the makeup/bras/tanning devices already in place without choosing some permanent solutions that may later be a problem. It’s good to use your real life situation in here (such as someone who has a cleft palate - maybe argue that they could be themselves in this position and still contribute to society?) or you could argue that it is causing problems in what we perceive. HOWEVER, you must then add an anticounter to show that the whole point is not ruined by this, for example say that while our alternatives are good, cosmetic surgery provides an outlet that is helping many people like transgender when the decision needs to be permanent. 

- All the while, include various quotations (you can find these on realquoptes etc specific to your subject from weird philosophers as it add to the credibility sometimes). And add stats. Also mention how this links to your ways of knowledge (ie, we know via sense perception and emotions, but shouldn’t we be able to choose how those reflect on us? therefore cosmetic surgery is justifiable?)

Argument two (Deontology for example/or ethics) AGAINST!!

Now you flip it all around.

You do everything as was instructed in the FOR only you’re proving that it is wrong, it is not a healthy alternative and we are causing our society to be fat-food endorsing, surgery hopeful people that over-exercise, over indulge and have some of the highest rates of depression/suicide in young people, simply because these surgeries come at such a high price and we are bombarded with views that are so impossible to live up to. For example, korean/asian people having huge procedures to be more westernized. It is ruining cultures. If your real life example is also about something similar (ie, mastectomy, maybe argue that it is not possible or economically viable for all breast cancer survivors to undergo reconstruction and cosmetic surgery, therefore it is not fair for some and not others, so by allowing this we are further perpetuating an inability to be ‘beautiful’ via society’s standards and not only are these women/men dealing with the horrors of breast cancer but also societal pressures/perception (link back to your idea about sense perception/emotions/ethics and how we are further causing people to be unable to accept difference or abnormal things, bringing an unhealthy sameness that causing people to commit suicide when they feel inadequate). You must also add a counter, reflect on your real life situation, and then anticounter. Counter it by saying that we need to make people feel safe and as they wish to be perceived, that it is wrong to say that we don’t have this as a good alternative because it is all down to choice, and society should not be close-minded when looking at others. Surgery should only enhance differences, rather than perfect abnormalities. Then anticounter it similarly as though your point previously was also so valid, saying ‘hey, we should be happy with our lot and it’s not always economically viable, therefore makeup and bras are often suitable and acceptable offers that are more affordable and less dangerous).

From this you may choose to do your other area (emotions sense perception or consequentialism. And do another FOR and AGAINST. These are down the same as the previous two, and then you come to your LOGICAL conclusion and PERSONAL conclusion ( VERY DIFFERENT). 

Logical conclusion is proven by your facts/stats and the argument flow that directs towards/against the FOR or AGAINST argument relating to your title (is it or is it NOT ethically justifiable?)

Personal conclusion is by your own opinions (however, this isn’t emotionally driven and it may be the SAME to your logical conclusion). It is intelligent to include this because often we accept what is right, but we don’t always totally agree with it. It’s good to say, “hey, i believe this is ethically unjust, however, I understand that in our society, it is still playing a key role when it is afforded by some, and by removing it from society, we would be perpetuating further discomfort for certain groups that it benefits, for example gender reassignment for transgender, and breast reconstruction for breast cancer survivors. That being said, it is still difficult for me to personally accept it.” 

We apologise for such a LONG post, but this is definitely something we’re very passionate about and have been teaching a lot about in our TOK lessons. 

Hopefully something in there helps. If you need explanations, help with linking your real life situation or little chapter edits, we’re happy to help!

Thanks a lot and GOOD LUCK!

So sorry, we’ve been MIA for so long due to Tumblr issues and hacking problems... :?

Situations are fairly difficult to select. It depends on your topic/idea and what you would like to achieve. We always suggest you have ONE good situation. Now this can be anything from an internet article, news article, press release, magazine clipping, science journal etc. So long as you can argue it for and against (especially effective in ethical arguments), then you can use just one situation and keep it all solid. 

One of our clear examples was the abortion of disabled children. The question was, “is it ever justifiable to abort a baby if it is known to be disabled?”

The example was one woman who was carrying twins and aborted her ONE disabled child only a short time before it was passed the legal time period to have an abortion. Arguments FOR this abortion (as in, it is justifiable) consisted of statistics showing recent UK abortions of disabled children increasing and in certain areas (where there was less abortion of disabled children) having higher domestic violence with the presence of a disabled child in the family. The arguments AGAINST this abortion (not justifable) consisted of quotations and ideas presenting a view that life is valuable in every fashion, and many children that are incorrectly aborted, also revealing many ‘disabled’ babies growing to contribute greatly to society. 

This was all tied in with the situation of this woman, with arguments like: 

- (against) this woman had an abortion of one of her children, thus threatening her other unborn child’s life because of the danger of a selective abortion. Is it justifiable that this woman threatened the life of her unborn child in order to abort her other disabled child? 

- (for) this woman claims to have been ‘elated’ when she was pregnant, however, when discovering that one of her twins would be born disabled, she felt stress and discomfort and felt like she would be unable to give it the care she could. In addition, the disabled child could cause the parents to have domestic issues, thus causing strain and neglect upon the children. 

And following this there are LOGICAL and PERSONAL conclusions (two, separate things that are important to distinguish). 

- from the information presented, I understand that the logical conclusion would be to maintain legality of abortion of disabled children, however with greater restrictions and provisions to ensure it is being done appropriately and in the best situations. 

- however, personally, I struggle with this and believe abortion of children that are deemed disabled in the womb should be illegal unless proven that the child will not be able to have any quality of life. I respect that abortion is a necessary practice in our growing world at this time and is preventing other issues, including domestic violence, struggles and economically unviable situations with young, single mothers, nonetheless, I believe in the future with our medical advances, the practice should soon become outdated and illegal.

Not sure if this helps yet. Please do message us with your ideas/topics if you would like personalised examples?

Cheers, and good luck all! :P

Unfortunately we're receiving many messages but we're not entirely able to access them (contacting Tumblr to figure out why we can't respond) so if you have asked us something and we have not replied personally that may be why. Some messages are allowing us to respond but others are not. So sorry. We'll fix this promptly. We will possibly post our responses (if we deem them ok for posting and they can help others) on our page and have your username and the question until we can directly respond to all our messages. If you do get a private response, your message is unaffected. This means we're unable to respond to anon because we can't identify your username on our public posts and you might have to wait until the problem is resolved.

Sorry again, it may be our connections at the moment. 

We will be sorted soon (fingers and toes crossed!)

Thanks so much for your kind comment! We’re about to upload all the sample essays and last explanations soon but on holiday it’s a little difficult, so keep posted! 

Firstly, we think you could use

- self-serving bias (especially in your ethics as this can be your ‘for’ - you need to define it before you leap into examples). 

• this refers to questions that aim for answers that are for the best interest of the person asking. You can give examples in the case of Law, such as Lawyers manipulating ethics with self-serving bias in order to prove their case or cause in the presence of a jury. While the questions are not to be ‘leading’ in a ethical fashion, they are full of self-serving bias, which taints the so-called ‘neutral’ question. You may counter this by claiming that all questions ethically could be seen as ‘neutral’ because there is no way the lawyer can truly control the response of the person being asked, however, there is a self-serving bias that can provide exceptional temptation to respond in their favor. We recommend that you find an example where a person providing evidence was lead into a response by a question from a lawyer, and how the question, although neutral to an extent, had self-serving bias and swayed the response, thus making the question neutral and suggesting that the title’s claim is justified. For example, a neutral question in court is something like, “Were you, or were you not at the place of crime at 9AM on 10th June?” but you can say it is inferring that something occurred at that point and it is leading the victim or questioned to respond specific to the event. Is it both neutral and non-neutral, but it’s as close as we can get. 

Another example in ethics could be: 

- Human nature - our values and beliefs lead us to understand or learn in life;

• so one could argue all our questions are neutral because they are purely designs constructed in order to attain knowledge that is unknown of at the time. Ethically, we ask in order to learn right from wrong, so we have to ask to learn. We lead ourselves by asking, learning, proving and advancing. The ‘unasked’ questions are still questions as we research, synthesis new methods and learn our new ethics. Updating these ethical values and morality in humans proves that nothing is predetermined if we ask “why?” however, it’s not neutral because there is an aim, a bias, a destination that is to be reached. A purpose in a question prevents it from being neutral. We can argue that ethically in our nature, we are unable to remove emotion, prejudice, background knowledge or any form of previous influence from our lives and therefore all neutral questions are impossible. However, one can argue that because this is the case, does that mean that every question could be interpreted as neutral because there is no ‘one’ answer to anything? (as one person may respond one way and another a completely different way). 

We’re finding a few more examples for you, but hopefully you’ll be able to get the gist of just arguing how our ethical values and systems prevent a completely neutral question that doesn’t beg for an ‘expected’ or manipulated response, however ethically we all have our specific responses therefore the question is neutral, but how we deal with it may not be. 

We’ll update a few more examples in the next few days. It might help if you tell us your other AOK as we can talk about linking examples (it’s important to discuss how your 2 AOKS are similar or different to get the higher marks). 

Sorry for the long explanation (still on vacation brain-modes), and we hope this helps!

1. Past papers - time yourself, mark yourself, be harsh on yourself, repeat the papers so if a similar question comes up you’ll be able to recognise how to do it. Over and over. Try to get your Maths papers done about 15 - 20 minutes under the time you’re given so if the paper has a tough question you have trained yourself to deal with that. 

2. Watch Youtube videos - sometimes it’s nicer to see someone do it for real and learn that way - all the questions are usually recycled but with different names - all the techniques will be the same. 

3. Use your class time - so if you’re stuck, ask. Honestly if you don’t ask enough you’ll never improve. Hog the teachers’ time. 

4. The IB maths study guide is very useful, and the Psych study guide is especially useful. 

5. Specifically for IB psych, make sure you know loads of definitions and you examine loads of cases. Past papers are your best bet and find different cases and talk them over with your teacher or friends/classmates about how to look at it. Sometimes other views can help you a bunch. 

Other than this, reading a lot and creating little notes, study-maps and repeating processes are always useful. Write things out and try to sum up entire topics on one page (you’re not only examining all that’s in the chapter but you’re trying to link things to cram it all together). 

Generally if you looked up the code for them you can get most papers online. There are also websites that provide them. In addition, every school should have a load of papers so if you ask your teachers for extra papers they should oblige. 

The code usually goes like this:

N12/2/ABSPA/TZ1/SP2/xx

(this is an example for a SL spanish paper) 

'N12' refers to November 2012

'/2/' refers to the SUBJECT GROUP NUMBER

'ANSPA' is the special code or that class (check your other papers for the specific one for each subject)

'TZ1' refers to the timezone (there are 3; TZ0, TZ1,TZ2)

'SP2' refers to paper 2. 

if you look at your papers you’ll see a code like this on the top right-hand corner and all you need to do is change the M or N for May or Nov and the year number in order to get the different papers. 

How many have we got out there? 

Your results will be released soon! (Jan 6 12:00 GMT)

How are you feeling? How did the exams treat you?

If you have any questions about accessing your results or anything else, we're happy to help!

Good luck!

Ah, what an open question. We’re currently on holiday at the moment until the new year, but we can give a few quick tips for this question. It will be updated with a more in-depth explanation in by January 5th when we return. 

Introduction; 

- You must outline the PURPOSE of your essay. ie: This essay will investigate purpose, weaknesses and strengths in the concept of perception with evidence from research studies to corroborate assumptions made. 

- DEFINE perception - specifically for its many different types/ways/interpretations/weaknesses etc. It’s better if you provide a definition from a trusted source/person and then elaborate on your take on its significance. 

- link it to cognitive processes. We think it’s important you signpost how perception is also connection to language, stimulus, attention, language, memory and thinking. This can be brief and expanded later. It is usually very good if you mention how deeply affected perception is by these cognitive processes. 

- Signpost all your essay will say. give your examples briefly if you have space in your intro (if your word count is getting high, don’t worry about it too much). 

Body paragraph(s);

- you must have specific examples to show the weaknesses/limitations, and strengths of perception. In doing so, you must link to cognitive processes and this will allow you to explain exactly WHAT it is because you know how it works. 

- maybe have 2 case studies, or ONE very strong study. outline it, explain it, then see its significance in perception and how it explains the purpose/role and meaning of perception. From this, you will be able to identify weaknesses and strengths and link it to other forms of cognitive processes. 

- remember to reference everything, give loads of quotations. If you can find a quotation that suggests that social, cultural and personal interactions cause different perception and our memory also contributes etc, then use it because it makes you look all the stronger in your argument. 

Conclusion; 

- you should outline your new definition granted by all you’ve proved with your evidence (research studies) and consider the assumptions of perception (we must have language or something in order to accurately perceive, so it’s not working alone) and reveal the weaknesses, strengths and main purpose of perception. 

- then consider its significance in our cognitive processes and to our lives. Make a statement about that and refer to your studies and proof. 

This is just a brief overview. We can give examples of case studies, draft paragraphs, intro etc at a later date but we’re celebrating new years. Hope it keeps you going. Do look up all cognitive processes and their connections and try to find your case studies. When you have those, you’re almost there. 

GOOD LUCK AND STAY OUT OF TROUBLE ALL! :P

Happy Xmas (belated) and a Happy New Year!

How to get a recent or current international stamp from Spain? We’ve got this massive project and it’s the one country that doesn’t seem to have online sales.

Anyone able to post us one (for a price, of course?) 

Or does anyone know where we can buy one online? 

HELP! THIS IS SO URGENT. 

This one makes us the most happy. It's such a nitty gritty question that the IB have given in order to trip everybody up! Often the titles with the fewest words trick students into thinking their easy and their often selected because of this. Do not be tricked; the long titles normally have a little more to go off and are the ones that gain the best marks. Then again, never fear if this is the title you have selected, it is possible to understand it! 

The title is as follows: 

"There is no such thing as a neutral question. Evaluate this statement with reference to two areas of knowledge."

Wow. The keywords are: 

"no such thing" - this blatantly shows that you must prove for and against. 

"neutral question" - of course, you must DEFINE this. We always recommend you read up on definitions, maybe give a definitions, but DEFINE it yourself in your essay, (ie; "a neutral question is considered to be structured to be without bias, informative leading and represents complete neutrality in order to receive the truest response without implications or persuasion from outside sources; however, I define it to be neutrality in order to gain a truth without an ulterior motive imposed within its structure, the opposite being a 'leading' question that provides a desired or expected response." If you define it yourself, your ideas will become clearer to us if we mark it! 

"evaluate" - don't just prove it, but disprove it. FOR and AGAINST. This means you need strong counters and also need to anti counter well. In this, it means you're not actually going to prove much. You'll prove that it there is no such thing in AOK 1 but then say well actually it has some element of bias, and then argue that this bias has no effect on the situation etc. Therefore you're not truly proving anything, but revealing its strengths and flaws. 

"two areas" - pick ones that are similar but different (we always love Natural Sciences and History because they're so different but wonderfully similar in their collection and collaboration of knowledge - ethics and law may be terrific options for an able candidate). 

NEXT ARE ASSUMPTIONS!

1. Neutral questions are impossible, therefore everything carries bias. 

2. The only form of question that there is has to be leading. 

3. In order to ask or respond to anything, there can be no neutrality. 

4. Everything we know has been manipulated by bias, therefore we may not know anything (vague, but it could be interesting to discuss). 

Finally, we'll move on to STRUCTURE/EXAMPLES (we're going to do History and Natural Sciences - but Maths or languages could be totally intriguing and we might do those at a later date). 

• Introduction 

- define neutrality, a neutral question, give your AOKs and signpost your assumptions (make sure you define a neutral question in both the AOKs because sometimes this can be different). Explain that is is possible and impossible to have a neutral question and your essay will discuss the extent to which the statement/title is valid in these selected AOKs. In doing so, you're signposting everything.

• Para 1 (AOK 1 - FOR - There is NO SUCH THING as a Neutral Question - Natural Sciences)

- Explain that there is no such thing. Of course there isn't. Everything in science has an end-goal. We want to discover something, we are aiming to learn or advance in something. Therefore, any scientific question we ask leads to an answer. We wanted that. For example, scientific method is a design of processes that we follow and create new experiments with. We deduce a hypothesis before we actually begin our expedient; therefore we have a goal at the beginning. We usually have a research question of "What is the effect of light intensity upon invertebrates?" and our hypothesis, whether correct or not, predicts what we believe will happen. Thus, our question is null and void because we expect something already. It's not neutral any longer. Counter: what happens if the hypothesis is wrong, does that make the question neutral again? Anti-Counter: Clearly, it's not because despite its validity, we are still aiming to have an answer and there is bias. 

- There are so many examples you could use, be creative! If you need help with examples, we can help out with a few sneaky ones! You could have one very good example or more than one, (use quotations from philosophical people like "So-and-so claims that "we cannot understand anything without having a reason to understand it at all" which may be applied to the case of our scientific method where the experimental results are predetermined in an attempt to understand it. Therefore the research question may not be neutral despite its attempt to be so." just to back yourself up and give it that bit of FLARE! :P)

• Para 2 (AOK 2 - FOR - There is NO SUCH THING as a Neutral Question - History).

- Similarly to the Natural Sciences, History attempts to understand the way things work and why things occur as they do. The collaboration and corroboration of information relies heavily on historical investigation and stories and facts justified by a collective acceptance and belief. Bias is involved in many aspects of History. As in science, we begin with a question, for example, "to what extent was the Battle of Verdun a French victory?" a question considered to be 'neutral' because of the words, "to what extent" in which we are lead to believe it will observe each viewpoint in order to determine the truth. However, this question suggests that there can be no neutral question in History because it suggests immediately and leads us to believe that it was a french victory. Does this reveal that all our questions in history lead us to a predetermined and expected answer? It is clear that emotion and perception impact heavily on our interpretations in history and the natural sciences; this supports the claim that there is no such thing as a neutral question as there is always a desired or expected response or motivation behind the question. Counter: however, we can understand that it will observe and investigation both sides of the question in order to allow for bias to be removed and a fair treatment of each viewpoint to be put across. The answer may be determined based on this and therefore the question is not 'leading' but rather signposting what is to be investigated. Anti-counter; clearly there is a motivation behind this kind of question and therefore it may not be neutral. This suggests that there is no such thing as a neutral question. 

- our example could be something on the lines of our dictators. Neutrality on our dictators may not be possible, for example the Duchess of Devonshire claims that Hitler was a "nice man" despite historians reflecting him as a horrible man. Does that mean her opinion is not valid for our question of "who was Hitler?" so… is it the question that is not neutral, or the responses that cause it to be biased? Hmmm… could be interesting. 

That's all we've got at the moment today, sorry. If you have specific questions, we can answer those in depth and give you good examples for any of your AOKS (but a general post is all we can do right now without loads of specific requests). 

If you request an introduction example, an essay example etc, please tell us if you've selected your AOKs and we can make it specific with good examples for you guys.

GOOD LUCK ALL AND STAY OUT OF TROUBLE! We'll be adding little bits each day to the titles as new ideas come up and we get more time to do it! 

Hope it helps!

We're going to keep saying that your learning should not be limited to these lists, but they are essentially all the things you ought to watch out for and have a good knowledge of. Past papers are your friends. Look out for Section B because it's always quite horrific if you haven't seen them before! IN ADDITION YOU MUST KNOW ALL DEFINITIONS. If you don't know what those are, just ask us and we'll post those too! :P

Here goes...

––––––––––––––––––––––––

Energetics:

• Exothermic and Endothermic Reaction 

- you must be able to define them (not exactly word for word, but it is useful) (bond breaking/making etc).

- you must know the difference (one releases, the other absorbs heat, and the products/reactants are more stable than the other etc. You must be able to draw the graphs as they sometimes give you a mark for that!)

- you must know the typical endo and exo reactions (neutralization, combustion, etc).

- you must know which sign each is (endo is positive because it absorbs energy, whereas exo is negative because it releases it and its system is 'cooler' than its surroundings). 

• Enthalpy of a reaction

- you must have a definition for this (and note when it needs to be in STP - standard conditions, 293K, 101.3kPa etc).

- you must memorise the equations for this and be able to manipulate it with examples (past papers will help with this). 

- you must be able to determine its reaction type (exo or endo) by working out its enthalpy (negative sign = exo etc).

- in this you must also be able to recognise systematic and human errors where percentages are not correct - heat loss to surroundings or poor insulation are good examples for this. 

• Hess' Law 

- you do not need to memorise a definition, but it is useful to understand it based on the definition. 

- know how to manipulate the steps of formation, enthalpy etc in order to prove hess' law. Sometimes this takes a lot of practice and we recommend you do past paper questions to tackle the common problems with these types of equations.

- understand how to draw the cycles - sometimes this will help you

• Bond enthalpy

- definition - you need it word-for-word.

- have at least 5 bullet points (using average bond enthalpies) on why reactions are endo or exo (putting energy in or taking it out etc).

• Standard Enthalpy changes of reaction (HL only)

- understand and be able to define (delta)H of formation and be able to calculate this

- calculate standard enthalpy of combustion (and the definition).

- you must be able to recognise and use the data booklet to work out the standard enthalpy a reaction using standard enthalpy of formation/combustion when either provided with some or most data.

• Born Haber Cycle (HL)

- define Lattice enthalpy and electron affinity - word-for-word definition please :P

- understand sizes and energies of lattices (at least 3 good bullet points) on why they contribute to the lattice enthalpy or electron affinity.

- you need to know that the relative value of the theoretical lattice enthalpy increases with higher ionic charge and smaller ionic radius due to increased forces of attraction

- understand and have at least 5 good bullet points on  the difference between theoretical and experimental lattice enthalpy values of ionic compounds in terms of their covalent character (have specific examples from past papers). A significant difference between the two values indicates covalent character.

- notice the assumptions made with this.

• Entropy (HL)

- define. Word-for-word! :P

- explain at least 3 bullet points of what contributes to entropy

- understand the sign of deltaH when there is the greatest entropy/least entropy (from this you need to know that entropy increases towards the side with the most gas molecules or the molecules that have been broken into more constituent parts).

- calculate the standard entropy change (the equation is in your data booklet, I believe)

• Spontaneity (deltaG)

- definite word-for-word

- be able to use the two equations to deduce its spontaneity (ΔGº= ΔHº - TΔ Sº and the ΔGº= ΔG(prod)º - ΔG(react)º)

- understand and memorise the signs of entropy, temperature and enthalpy required for spontaneous reactions etc.

- predict spontaneity with reactions (takes practice).

- predict an effect of temperature on this. once again, you may need to practise this. Learn what signs are required for spontaneous reactions and this should just come as second nature to you.

–––––––––––––––––––––––

That's it for energetics. Once again, a large post and hard to digest. If you have any questions, we are happy to answer! Thanks for reading and we hope it helps!

Good luck troops! :-) 

We did a small post previously on Title Four before we posted our introduction. (not quite to the extent of title six) if you want to check that out in the ToK tag! But sure! We're so happy to do that for you! We'll give a few examples and give our opinions of good evidence and a few ok counters/anticounters etc. 

We believe this title is the hardest to digest of all the prescribed titles for the May session of 2015. We're predicting that there will be more focus on   the ways in which we provide knowledge in the November session (getting that out there so we can be proven right or wrong when they're released in March!)

We're going to explain our interpretations based on how we're teaching them before we write post the essay. 

“The whole point of knowledge is to produce both meaning and purpose in our personal lives.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?

This is a title that does not ask specifically for you to limit yourself to two areas of knowledge. We always suggest that our students do so because of limited words. You can't simply do one because you need to be able to link AOKs in order to secure higher marks. 

The 'whole point' is a poor choice of wording in our opinion, but IB chose it for a reason. We believe this means the 'bigger picture.'

'knowledge' needs to be defined in order to argue your points.

'meaning' is a kind of justification feeling - possibly knowledge is what provides us with a sense of worth?

'purpose' is a 'place' or position in the world. This is our motivation to keep learning? Without knowledge, we cannot add to knowledge and we have no purpose in the world? 

The assumptions we see are:

- that only knowledge may provide meaning and purpose, but this may not be the case. 

- that knowledge has no other purpose

- knowledge that does not give purpose and/or meaning is not considered to be knowledge

We would separate it as follows: 

Introduction

- (definitions, ideas, assumption signposted)

Para 1

- AOK 1 - yes this knowledge provides purpose/meaning in our personal lives and this is the 'whole point'

- EXAMPLE [ie; in the Natural Sciences, the analysis of Richard III's DNA provides purpose and meaning for our personal lives as we understand truly the significance of our advancement in order to reveal the truths - in addition, our society learns together and updates the body of knowledge, therefore the production of new knowledge, and therefore the whole point of knowledge in the Natural Sciences, is to allow exploration and learning. This provides individuals with a purpose and gives a deeper meaning in their personal lives. Without this knowledge, there would be minimal connection between people.]

- COUNTER [ie; however, we can see that in this area there are aspects that do not provide meaning or purpose but reveal the 'facts' as a collection of accepted theories. This may infact distort the purpose and meaning in our personal lives as it reveals the flaws in our previous methods in the Natural Sciences and may cause a loss of confidence in the knowledge we have today]

- ANTICOUNTER [ie; however, these facts are significant in all we understand in this area, therefore we are provided a sense of purpose from the body of knowledge and a deeper meaning is introduced to our lives as we understand that our lives are intended for further learning, expression and change in pathways, as demonstrated by the update and investigation of Richard III's DNA sample after so many years. The revelation of the truths for our Monarchy challenge our belief system, and provided a greater purpose and meaning in our personal lives. By understanding that it is possible to shift and change our paradigm, we are able to find greater meaning in our personal lives, and this extends to discovering new purposes in life].

WANT US TO CONTINUE? Tell us! :-) We only want to write what is useful to you! 

(We would repeat this for the second AOK and then change it to a AGAINST argument where we do not agree). 

Before we really jump into everything, what are your thoughts? It's good if loads of interpretations are brought together for all the candidates to see. Which areas would you select to tackle this question?