tok essay prescribed titles november 2023

• May 20, 2023

Unpacking the 2023 November TOK Titles: A Comprehensive IB Solved Guide

The November 2023 titles for the IB Theory of Knowledge Essay have been released! Let's face it – the TOK essay can be very intimidating. With so many topics to choose from and so many ideas bouncing around, it can be hard to know where to begin. That's where we come in. In this post, we'll take a closer look at each of the titles and give you some tips for approaching them.

General Tips to Unpacking a Title

Whenever we approach a prompt, we always want to think in terms of perspectives and counter-perspectives (for those who are familiar with the old syllabus, these were previously known as claims and counterclaims). This allows us to structure the essay within the two selected AOKs, creating four paragraphs directly addressing the title and with consideration of varying perspectives on the title. While the final conclusion that we draw will likely lie somewhere in the middle, or argue that each perspective is more/less correct in different circumstances, it is often helpful to think of the two extremes first before trying to come up with a more nuanced conclusion.

So let’s get into unpacking them – here is everything you need to know about each of the November 2023 TOK Essay titles:

Title 1: Are facts alone enough to prove a claim? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

Recommended AOKs: Natural Sciences, Human Sciences, History

For this title, the perspective and counter-perspective are straightforward – either facts alone are enough to prove a claim, or they are not.

Some ideas to think about which support the first perspective:

Facts are objective – By providing objective evidence for a claim, facts can be a highly reliable form of evidence to support claims made by knowers. This objectivity allows for the same claim to be proven across time, in different cultures and by unique knowers.

Facts allow for conclusions to be drawn through logic – By combining an array of established facts, deductive reasoning can be utilised to draw conclusions about the world and produce new knowledge. Often facts form the premises from which knowledge claims can be made, allowing a knower to prove a claim by first establishing a series of interconnected facts.

Facts can be tested – This is particularly important for science-based AOKs which rely upon falsification as an important method of producing new knowledge. Since facts can be tested, the veracity of a knower’s claim is always available to be disproven by empirical evidence.

For your counter-perspective, you have a far greater degree of freedom in your discussion. This is where you can really differentiate your essay from others, as it is your job to decide which other important elements beyond facts alone may be necessary to prove a claim. Some ideas from us:

Opinions – Whilst opinions lack the objectivity of facts, they are often important to proving knowledge claims, as these claims are often unable to be proven by facts alone. Rather inferences must be drawn to create meaning from facts. This can be illustrated through a very simple claim: Imagine for instance that we were trying to prove the claim that Germany were responsible for World War I. Whilst we could drawn upon facts, such as the fact that they issued a blank cheque to Austria-Hungary or the fact that they invaded Belgium in August 1914, ultimately we rely upon the opinions of historians in making a judgement on how important this was in the context of the war.

Personal Experience – Whilst personal experiences only provide anecdotal evidence and cannot allow us to draw broader conclusions, they may be necessary to prove a claim which involves emotion or personal beliefs.

Creativity – Creative thinking may be necessary to prove claims, particularly in the sciences, where facts alone are insufficient. For instance, scientific theories, whilst based in fact, are often dependent on analogies, comparisons and metaphor to explain abstract concepts for which there may not yet be any measurable or empirical evidence.

Title 2: If “the mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s and the poet’s, must be beautiful” (G.H. Hardy), how might this impact the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.

This title is far more intricate than the others, relying heavily upon the definitions you impose upon key terms. The concept of the “mathematician’s patterns” and the term “beautiful” must be defined in the opening of the essay, as this will restrict the scope of your knowledge exploration. The way in which we would recommend splitting up this topic would be to first discuss the impact upon the production of knowledge in mathematics and then within the Arts. Some ideas for the perspectives and counter-perspectives which you may explore include:

Beauty in Mathematics – You will want to consider the importance of beauty in Mathematics. This is not referring to beauty in the traditional sense but perhaps considering other ways in which Mathematics may be considered beautiful such as in its way of transforming complex real-world problems into simple symbols which can be solved. This can impact the production of knowledge as mathematicians may choose to ignore solutions which are complex and rough – in other words, ‘mathematically ugly’.

Beauty in Art – In discussing this AOK, you may consider the debate between aestheticism and purpose within the Arts – In other words, is Art merely supposed to ‘look good’ or does it have a greater purpose, and how does this relate to the production of knowledge in and through the Arts.

Title 3: In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Recommended AOKs: Human Sciences and Natural Sciences/History/Math

This title presents a very contemporary issue which is the questioning of experts and trust in the knowledge produced by experts. Nonetheless, there is a clear perspective and counter-perspective presented by this title – it is either more dangerous to follow experts unquestioningly or more dangerous to ignore them completely.

Some ideas relevant to the first perspective:

Evidence over Experts – By following experts unquestioningly, rather than examining the quality of their evidence and research methods, we fall into the trap of making arguments from authority without confirming that their conclusions are actually correct.

Subjective Experiences – While experts are helpful in drawing general conclusions/findings about the world, they do not account for subjective, individual experiences. This is particularly relevant in the Human Sciences, as theories and claims of human behaviour may not apply to all people due to the uniqueness of humans.

Lack of Progress – It is only by questioning established paradigms and claims made by existing experts that we are able to progress and acquire new knowledge. If all experts are followed unquestioningly, there can be no overhaul of existing knowledge when necessary.

Some ideas relevant to the counter-perspective:

Established Research Systems – Experts are trained in effective research methodologies and have systems to maximise the reliability of the claims they make. By ignoring experts, we are instead relying upon knowledge of laypeople whose claims have not been rigorously assessed for their veracity.

Manipulation and Logical Fallacies – By ignoring the claims of experts and instead acquiring knowledge through prominent figures such as celebrities and the media, we expose ourselves to manipulation and the array of logical fallacies employed by these individuals who have their own agenda beyond the dissemination of knowledge.

Knowledge Framework – Experts develop knowledge frameworks which can guide the production of new knowledge. By ignoring experts, we are often left to deal with problems on a case-by-case basis which can lead to a lack of consistency and structure within the knowledge which is acquired.

Title 4: Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

Recommended AOKs: History, Arts, Human Sciences

This title has a focus on context and values, integral elements of the knowledge framework within the new syllabus. It also has two clear perspectives to be explored – the claim that it is problematic or the claim that it is not, keeping in mind that across both perspectives, it must be specified how knowledge is shaped by individual values.

Some ideas for the first perspective:

Bias – The shaping of knowledge by one’s individual values can create bias which may impede the reliability of knowledge produced through the lens of these values.

Subjectivity – If subjective beliefs founded in one’s values are imported into the production of knowledge which should be based on facts and evidence, this can be problematic for this knowledge.

Lack of Diversity/One-Sided Knowledge – When entire banks of knowledge are produced by individuals from the same background, culture, beliefs or school of thought, this can lead to the omission of other perspectives on an issue, which can limit the knowledge which is produced.

Individual Perspective are Important – It is often important for a knower to incorporate their own personal perspective in the production of knowledge as this is ultimately the only way in which interpretations and opinions beyond mere facts can be drawn.

Knowledge about the Knower – We can often learn more about a knower, their values and the social norms of their time when evaluating knowledge claims which are shaped by individual values, providing a second layer of ‘knowledge within knowledge’.

Specific Knowledge – Whilst not broadly applicable to people or contexts with different values, knowledge produced by those with particular individual values can be more specific and applicable to knowers within the same value system. This form of ‘insider knowledge’ may be shaped by the personal experiences of an individual, which is an asset to the production of knowledge rather than a hinderance.

Title 5: Is it always the case that “the world isn’t just the way it is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it” (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.

This title touches upon the debate between objective and relativistic views of knowledge and the world. The phrase ‘is it always the case’ allows us to derive two perspectives to explore – it either is always the case or it is not. The first perspective requires arguments which explain why this may always be the case, whereas the second only requires you to provide some exceptions/circumstances in which this would not be the case.

Interpretation creates Meaning – It may be argued that all elements of the world must be interpreted and doing so involves the unique lens of each individual knower. In this way, what we bring to the production of knowledge is our own distinct interpretation of the world around us.

Questioning creates Meaning – We could also consider how the questions which knowers ask are unique and based upon our own individual understanding of the world. This means that something new is created each time a new knower attempts to understand the world, as the questions asked and curiosity of each individual provides a distinct approach to knowledge.

Some ideas for the counter-perspective:

Objectivity Exists – It may be argued that there are some elements of the world which are fixed, unquestionable and objective. These components of knowledge are not dependent upon the interpretation of the individual, as there should be objective standards from which everyone should draw the same conclusion.

Repeatability – Particularly in the Natural Sciences, there are some elements of knowledge which are repeatable and not reliant upon the interpretation of the individual knower. This concept of repeatability is a foundational tenet of the sciences and the production of new knowledge of the world around us.

Title 6: Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Recommended AOKs: Natural Sciences and Human Sciences/History/Arts

This title questions the way in which we determine whether a piece of information is significant for knowledge. Since this is a ‘how’ question, there are many perspectives which can be explored, rather than a clear binary of perspectives. Some ideas from us:

Selection through Merit – This concept is particularly relevant to the Natural Sciences, as the theories which are ultimately deemed as significant are those which are not falsified. This merit-based approach pits scientific theories against each other to determine which are significant for the acquisition of knowledge.

Selection through Structure and Processes – By establishing set systems and procedures for filtering the vast amount of information available within an AOK, we can make selections as to which knowledge is significant.

Selection through Applicability – When judging what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge, a knower may have to consider the vast amount of information and decipher which piece of information is most applicable to their context, values or specific circumstances.

So there you have it! By now, you should have a better idea about which TOK essay title stands out the most to you and maybe even a few ideas about what to write. But where do you begin? Don't worry, we understand that writing a Theory of Knowledge essay can be a daunting task, but with the help of our expert IB tutors, you'll be on your way to success in no time. Plus, with online IB tutoring available, you can get the help you need from anywhere in the world. Don't let the TOK essay stress you out – contact us today to learn more about our IB tutoring services and how we can help you succeed in your IB studies.

IB Solved: Achieve Your IB Dreams and Secure Your Future!

• Internal Assessment Guides

Recent Posts

The Secrets to Success in the Theory of Knowledge (TOK) Essay

TOK DISCUSSIONS

Theory of knowledge prescribed titles

November 2023 examination session

Are facts alone enough to prove a claim? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

If “the mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s and the poet’s, must be beautiful” (G.H. Hardy), how might this impact the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.

In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

Is it always the case that “the world isn’t just the way it is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it” (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.

Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

November 2023 Title #1

Are facts alone enough to prove a claim?

Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

Just because something is a fact, it doesn’t necessarily mean that it proves a claim to be true. Other evidence and context may be needed to fully support a claim.

For example, the IB Diploma Programme is a curriculum for high schoolers that can help them get into good universities. If you finish the program, you might have a better chance of going to a good university than if you didn’t. But success in life is not just about school - it’s also about being smart, having good social skills, and handling tough situations. So, while the IB Diploma Programme might help you do well in school, it doesn’t mean that you will automatically be successful in life. The claim “Studying IB makes you successful in life” can’t be proven just based on the facts about IBDP.

In History, American Civil War is a real-life example to be explored under this title prompt. In the Natural Sciences, Galileo Galilei’s heliocentrism could be discussed. You can also analyze the Stanford Prison Experiment within the Human Sciences. In the Arts, the best example could be the story of Han van Meegeren and his authenticated forgeries! Things get complicated for Mathematics. You can find some cases related to Euclidean geometry, like the debate over the parallel postulate. Enter at your own risk, it is Mathematics after all.

To write your TOK essay for this title prompt, define the words “fact,” “claim,” and “prove.” Sometimes, you clearly argue your claim, but your audience won’t accept it. In this case, have you “proven” the claim or not? And to whom?

In summary, you always need more than just facts to prove a claim, especially a knowledge claim in an area of knowledge.

November 2023 Title #2

If “the mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s and the poet’s, must be beautiful” (G.H. Hardy),

how might this impact the production of knowledge?

Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.

To answer the prompt, first, you can look at what “beauty” means in mathematics and the arts, and how it’s different for each. You can then discuss how creativity and aesthetics impact knowledge production in these fields, and how seeking beauty can shape new ideas and methods.

Another take on this is to point out some “overly modern” mindsets in these two areas of knowledge. Mathematicians probably should not prioritize beauty above practicality. Also, artists may not need to inject sociopolitical ideas into every single piece of art; first, make it beautiful, then meaningful.

The Golden Ratio is a good example of a beautiful but not very useful mathematical concept, as it is primarily interesting from an aesthetic perspective. The study of topology produces beautiful and intricate mathematical structures, but it does not have many practical applications. The paintings of Ernst Kirchner and Emil Nolde often prioritize social commentary over aesthetics, as seen in works such as Kirchner’s “Self-Portrait as a Soldier” and Nolde’s “Prophet.” Guerrilla Girls posters are a good example of art that focuses on social commentary, often highlighting issues related to feminism and politics. Some of Chopin’s and Liszt’s pieces, such as Chopin’s “Revolutionary Etude” and Liszt’s “La Campanella,” showcase technical virtuosity rather than simply aiming to please the audience.

November 2023 Title #3

In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely?

Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.

First, you need to explain what it means to blindly follow experts without questioning them, and talk about why this can be risky. For example, when people don’t question their doctor’s diagnosis or treatment. Then, you should talk about what can happen if you ignore the advice of experts completely. You can give examples of times when people follow conspiracy theorists instead of “experts.” Make sure to briefly define what you mean by “expert” in your essay to avoid confusion.

A recent, and maybe the best, real-life example of blindly following or ignoring expert advice in the Human Sciences can be found in economics, specifically in cryptocurrency. Some blindly followed the trend and suffered significant losses, while others who completely ignored it missed out on opportunities to increase their wealth and fell behind in the money race.

The second area of knowledge that you choose can be the Natural Sciences, for which, the COVID pandemic is a repetitive yet still good example. People who obeyed every single instruction by staying at home for months, wearing masks everywhere, and receiving all the shots, are now suffering from psychological and physical trauma. And well, some of those who totally ignored the experts died!

November 2023 Title #4

Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it?

First of all, what does it even mean? “Knowledge is often shaped by the values of those who produce it” means that the knowledge we acquire, create and disseminate is often influenced by the personal, cultural, and social values, beliefs, and biases of the individuals and communities involved in its creation. For example, a scientist may prioritize research in curing abdomen pain over the headache, or an engineer may develop a technology to take better photographs instead of scanning the Earth’s surface. However, is this necessarily a bad thing, or is it “problematic,” as the title suggests?

One big problem is that everyone has different values, so it can be hard to decide if the knowledge created by others is good or not. And most of the time knowledge producers don’t share the same values as knowledge consumers, as the producers are not ordinary people, but the consumers are. But usually, the knowledge production process starts based on cultural or social values, or at least is guided by them along the way.

Develop your argument both to show that it is problematic and also not so much. And as you know well, you should argue through real-life examples. In History, almost every piece of knowledge is biased and you can find historical events with two sides, like the story of the “Gallipoli campaign” told by the Ottomans versus the Australians version. In Sciences, experts mostly cause confusion, as we experienced through the COVID pandemic. The social and political values of the scientists confused people about whether to take the vaccines or not, and whether to wear the mask or not. Economists also seem never to agree upon the future price of a currency or stock.

Arts have a different story. Artistic values or the values promoted through art can be destructive let alone problematic. The new generation of rappers, those like Cardi B, produce artistic knowledge and promote values that are by far less than human dignity, and all of them were “shaped by the values of those who produce it.” Pure Mathematics is safe from these controversies; however, the production of knowledge for big data, micro-targeting, and such is shaped by the values of those who were driven by greed or even worse political agendas.

It is crucial to avoid confusing “knowledge production” with “knowledge consumption” when writing your TOK essay on this topic. Be careful not to focus solely on cases where “good” knowledge is misused or abused.

November 2023 Title #5

Is it always the case that “the world isn’t just the way it is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it” (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)?

Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.

This title prompt is a good one, as it finally lets you decide which side you want to be on and express how you feel about something. Although, you still need to show your awareness of other points of view. So, do you think “it is what it is,” or can we take the best out of what comes to us?

In 1492, the world was a vastly different place than it is today. Many Europeans believed that the Earth was flat and that sailing too far would result in falling off the edge of the world. However, one man had a different understanding of the world: Christopher Columbus.

Columbus believed the world was round and that he could reach Asia by sailing west across the Atlantic. Despite facing significant opposition and skepticism, Columbus set out on his voyage with three ships: the Nina, the Pinta, and the Santa Maria.

As the ships sailed across the vast expanse of the Atlantic, Columbus and his crew faced many challenges, including storms, seasickness, and the constant fear of running out of supplies. But Columbus remained steadfast in his belief that they would find land, and after several weeks at sea, they finally spotted land on the horizon.

Columbus didn’t discover Asia, as he had hoped, but a new continent unknown to Europeans at the time. This discovery challenged the prevailing understanding of the world and opened up new possibilities for trade, exploration, and colonization. Columbus’s journey shows that our understanding of the world can shape how we interact with it and what we can achieve. In this sense, “the world isn’t just the way it is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it.”

In the mid-twentieth century, the field of genetics was just beginning to emerge. Scientists were trying to understand the structure of DNA and how it stored and transmitted genetic information in living organisms.

James Watson and Francis Crick were two young scientists working at Cambridge University fascinated by this question. They believed DNA held the key to unlocking the secrets of life itself, and they worked tirelessly to uncover its structure. In 1953, Watson and Crick made a groundbreaking discovery. They proposed that DNA was a double helix structure consisting of two strands of nucleotides twisted together. This discovery was revolutionary and helped to explain how genetic information is copied and passed on to new cells.

Watson and Crick’s discovery completely changed the field of genetics and opened up new possibilities for scientific research. It challenged the prevailing understanding of the time and paved the way for new developments in molecular biology, including gene editing and the study of genetic disorders.

They didn’t accept that “the world is just the way it is.”

November 2023 Title #6

Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge?

Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

When we face a lot of information, it can be hard to know what is important for us to learn. One way to handle this is to think critically about what we want to learn and what we already know. We can then look at different sources of information and decide which ones are reliable and helpful. We must question the accuracy, trustworthiness, and recentness of the information.

There is also another hidden point in this title prompt – “what is significant for the acquisition” can refer to the type or delivery of the information compared to knowledge as a whole.

In natural sciences, when choosing between two nutrition apps, such as App A and App B, a person should research each app’s information, reviews, and endorsements from reputable organizations. Based on their findings, they can make an informed decision about which app to use. For example, if App A has positive reviews from users and nutrition experts, as well as personalized meal plans and progress tracking, it may be the better choice. However, the person may also want to compare both apps firsthand before deciding. Additionally, seeking out other sources of reliable nutrition information, such as reputable websites, books, or consulting with a registered dietitian, can help them make informed decisions about their health and nutrition goals.

In human sciences, when faced with two investment options, such as Option A and Option B, an investor must conduct research to determine which option offers the best return on investment. The investor should look for reviews and endorsements from reputable organizations, as well as any ratings from other investors. After researching both options, the investor might discover that Option A has a proven track record of delivering consistent returns, diversification of portfolio, and low fees, while Option B has a higher risk profile and mixed reviews. Based on this information, the investor might choose Option A for more reliable and consistent returns, or they may test both options firsthand before making a decision. Additionally, the investor might seek out other reliable sources of financial information, such as financial news websites, books, or a consultation with a financial advisor, to make informed decisions about their investments that align with their investment goals and risk tolerance.

You can find your own scenarios and real-life example and develop your argument in similar ways.

Be the first to receive Titles Explanations and Tips by subscribing to our newsletter below and read full explanations and study examples and sample texts in the Ultimate Guide .

Let’s Unpack the November 2023 TOK Essay Titles Together!

As someone who’s been through the IB program and written more TOK essays than I can count, I’m super excited to dive into the TOK essay titles for November 2023 with you. 

I’m hoping my insights will give you a fresh perspective and help you craft theory of knowledge essays that really stand out. So, are you ready? Let’s get started!

List of IB TOK Essay Prompts November 2023

November prompt 1  – are facts alone enough to prove a claim discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge..

This question invites us to explore the nature of facts and their role in validating claims. Consider the AOKs of Natural Sciences and Human Sciences. In Natural Sciences, facts are often seen as objective and reliable, but they are also subject to interpretation and can change as new evidence emerges. In Human Sciences, facts can be influenced by personal and cultural perspectives. For WOKs, consider Reason and Language. How do we use reason to interpret facts? How does language influence our understanding of facts? For a real-life situation (RLS), you could discuss a scientific theory that was once accepted as fact but has since been disproven.

November Prompt 2  – If “the mathematician’s patterns, like the painter’s and the poet’s, must be beautiful” (G.H. Hardy), how might this impact the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.

This prompt is about the intersection of aesthetics and knowledge. Consider the AOKs of Mathematics and The Arts. How does the concept of beauty apply in these areas? For WOKs, consider Intuition and Emotion. How do these ways of knowing contribute to our perception of beauty? For an RLS, you could discuss how the beauty of the Fibonacci sequence has inspired research in various fields.

November Prompt 3  – In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.

This question is about the role of authority in knowledge acquisition. Consider the AOKs of Human Sciences and History. How does the authority of experts influence our understanding in these areas? For WOKs, consider Memory and Faith. How do we rely on these ways of knowing when dealing with experts? For an RLS, you could discuss a historical event where the unquestioning acceptance of an expert’s opinion led to negative consequences..

November Prompt 4  – Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge .

This question is about the influence of values on knowledge. Consider the AOKs of History and Human Sciences. How do the values of historians or social scientists shape the knowledge they produce? For WOKs, consider Reason and Emotion. How do these ways of knowing interact with our values? For an RLS, you could discuss a historical narrative that has been influenced by the historian’s values.

November Prompt 5  – Is it always the case that “the world isn’t just the way it is, it is how we understand it – and in understanding something, we bring something to it”? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.

This prompt is about the role of interpretation in knowledge acquisition. Consider the AOKs of History and Natural Sciences. How does our interpretation shape our understanding in these areas? For WOKs, consider Imagination and Perception. How do these ways of knowing contribute to our interpretation? For an RLS, you could discuss a historical event and how different interpretations can lead to different understandings.

November Prompt 6  – Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

This question is about the process of selecting information. Consider the AOKs of Natural Sciences and Human Sciences. How do we select significant information in these areas? For WOKs, consider Reason and Memory. How do these ways of knowing guide our selection process? For an RLS, you could discuss the process of conducting a literature review for a research project.

Remember, these are just suggestions to get you started. Feel free to explore other AOKs, WOKs, and RLSs that resonate with you. And if you need any help along the way, don’t hesitate to reach out to us at IB Writing Service . We’re here to support you in your TOK essay writing process.

Select Nov 2023 TOK Title Wisely

So, there you have it, folks! The November 2023 TOK essay prompts are a goldmine of ideas waiting to be explored. As you dive into these prompts, remember to think critically, question assumptions, and bring your unique perspective to the table.

WE CAN HELP YOU WRITE A TOK ESSAY ON ANY TOPIC

Calculate the Quote for Custom IB TOK Essay

Now, I know that writing a TOK essay can be a bit daunting, especially when you’re juggling other IB assignments. But guess what? You’re not alone in this.

We at IB Writing Service are here to help. We’re not just experts in writing IB IA and Extended Essays ; we also specialize in helping IB students with other assignments, including TOK essays. 

So, if you need a helping hand, don’t hesitate to reach out to us and buy a TOK essay online from IB experts. We’re here to make your IB writing process a little less stressful and a lot more successful. Let’s do this together!

Get hot offers and discounts for your IB Assignments

Our writing solutions cater to all disciplines within the IB program, and we specialize in crafting academic papers for students of all levels. We follow the IB criteria.

Adhering strictly to the rigorous standards set by the IB, we deploy a methodical approach to our writing process. This ensures that every piece of content we generate not only meets but exceeds the expectations set within the program.

Contact us:

[email protected]

[email protected]

Latest Articles:

Extended Essay vs. Internal Assessment

November 2024 TOK Essay Titles. Short Description for Each Topic and How to Write It

Interdisciplinary Topics in Extended Essays

Our services:.

• Buy Internal Assessment
• Buy Math IA
• Buy Extended Essay
• Buy TOK Essay
• Buy TOK Exhibition

IBWritingService.com is an independent academic writing aid with no official ties to the International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO). Our use of “IB” in the domain and title is purely for identification, and we neither claim nor imply any endorsement or partnership with the IBO. Our services aim to support students’ educational needs without violating IBO policies. Trademarks mentioned are property of their owners and do not suggest affiliations. By using our services, you acknowledge our non-affiliation with the IBO and that we’re not a substitute for IBO requirements. We deny any liability for use of our services in relation to the IBO.

ALL PAPERS WRITTEN BY OUR EXPERTS AS PART OF THIS WRITING SERVICE ARE FOR REFERENCE PURPOSES ONLY. WHEN USING CONTENT PURCHASED FROM THIS WEBSITE, IT MUST BE PROPERLY REFERENCED.

• Terms & Conditions
• Revision Policy
• Privacy Policy
• Refund Policy
• Cookie Policy

© 2023. All Rights Reserved.

Choosing your ToK Essay Question

• March 6, 2023
• Student Support , ToK Essay

As the November 2023 ToK Essay title starts it is a good time to revisit advice on choosing your ToK Essay title. During the 10 years that I marked ToK Essays as an IB Examiner I learned a lot about what makes a good ToK Essay. More importantly, how students can write a good essay with minimum stress.

Choosing your ToK Essay Question.

• The questions are called “ Prescribed Titles “(aka PT), as they’re not actually questions per se. They are knowledge statements, or knowledge questions, which you are invited to “discuss”. This means that you need to consider a range of different perspectives arising from the title. When choosing your ToK Essay Question consider whether you have (or can develop) a range of perspectives on the title.
• Do not change, nor amend, a single word of the PT. You must address the question exactly as IB give it to you.

Ensure that you get the exact title from your teacher . Non-IB Sites (such as TokToday) are not supposed to publish the exact titles (they’re copyrighted by IB).

Take your time choosing.

Choosing the ToK Essay title which is right for you is at least 50% of the ‘ battle for success ‘ in the ToK Essay, so take your time at this stage. My students spend 4-6 weeks on choosing the title, it’s super important to get this stage correct. In deciding which title to write you are should be trying to clarify:

• What does this question mean to me ?
• Do I have an initial instinctive view about this question ?
• Do I have some ideas about arguments that would help me to answer this question ?
• Do I have a destination for my answer ? (this may change later on, but something at an initial stage will be helpful).

These questions smoothly segue into our second tip on how to choose your ToK Essay Question: Blank Slate.

Know Yourself: Blank Slate those titles.

Try not to be too influenced by other people’s voices at this stage of your essay writing process, try to hear your own voice.

Know your own mind, try not to be influenced by the voices of others. Approach the titles as a ‘ blank slate ‘ – ie no pre-judgment.

Eventually you will have to write your own, original, response to the question. Therefore you don’t want to be too influenced by other people’s views at this stage (you can explore their views later). You need to be developing your own view(s) at this stage.

Be original.

Many of the best essays that I have read have been where the student developed their own original, and quite novel, argument at this early stage. Now, it may seem rather self defeating for me to tell you to stay away from internet advice sites either before or during the essay, however the particular type of content that I think you should be wary of is content that tells you what the arguments (claims / counterclaims) could/should be, or what real life examples you should use. This directive content doesn’t improve your skills & understanding in ToK because you don’t have to think for yourself.

Develop your own arguments, and think of possible real life examples to illustrate these arguments, before you start exploring the internet. Once you have your own original framework down you’ll be in a good place to start further research. You can now use academic sources, non-academic sources and ToK specific sources to further develop your ideas and range of sources cited. If you wait until you have developed your own ideas before you go to the Internet (& other sources) then you won’t be negatively influenced / swayed by the sources that you find. By developing your own ideas you will find writing the essay far easier than trying to develop other peoples ideas. This is why it’s so important to spend time early in the essay writing process working on your own claims counterclaims and real life examples.

Know your destination.

Before you finally decide it is useful to have a rough idea of how you will resolve that question. That is a vague idea of what your final answer to the question might be (ie your “destination”). You don’t have to know exactly how you are going to resolve the question before you choose the question (as many new ideas and perspectives will be developed during the planning and writing stages.

A rough idea of destination guides the writer like it guides the walker

A rough idea of destination guides the writer, like it guides the walker.

As you write the essay you will develop new ideas, make new connections and develop new perspectives. You will refine your arguments, and you may even change your arguments. This is a normal, and healthy, aspect of the writing process. You may even change your final destination, the important thing when choosing a question – have direction and destination in mind. Far too often I meet students who are “stuck”, usually because they are unsure of their approximate final destination. They didn’t work on a solution or resolution before they chose a question. – not a good place to be.

A few ‘easy ways’ to check your understanding of the title:

• Explain the question to a non-ToK student.
• Bring in your Mum, Dad, sibling (or even dog) and explain the title to them.

When they can understand your explanation you can be sure that you now have a solid understanding of the question.

More help is available:

• Check out the ToKToday YouTube Channel for tips (especially the Student Playlist).
• Pick up the E-book How to Write the ToK Essay in 6 Easy Steps .

If you need more help to choose your question, or to develop your question then get in touch ([email protected]). Click here to book a ToK Coaching session.

Daniel, Lisboa, Portugal, March 2023

[…] 3 Tips for choosing your ToK Essay Title. […]

[…] 3 Tips for choosing your ToK Essay Title. […]

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Discover more from toktoday.

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Type your email…

Continue reading

We noticed you're visiting from Hong Kong. We've updated our prices to Hong Kong dollar for your shopping convenience. Use Euro instead. Dismiss

• Jul 10, 2023
• 12 min read

November 2023 TOK Essay Titles Explained with Examples

The prescribed titles for the November 2023 TOK Essay has been released! Here are all the titles with detailed explanation and examples to get you started:

Are facts alone enough to prove a claim? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

If "the mathematician's patterns, like the painter's and the poet's, must be beautiful" (G.H. Hardy), how might this impact the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and the arts.

In the acquisition of knowledge, is following experts unquestioningly as dangerous as ignoring them completely? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Is it problematic that knowledge is so often shaped by the values of those who produce it? Discuss with reference to any two areas of knowledge.

Is it always the case that "the world isn't just the way I is, it is how we understand it - and in understanding something, we bring something to it" (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.

Faced with a vast amount of information, how do we select what is significant for the acquisition of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Below are the explanations. If you need help with TOK concepts and how to write a good essay, check out the resources in the TOK subject page!

While an initially simple prompt, sometimes the simplest statements are also the hardest to prove. I definitely feel that this is the case here. This prompt hinges on how you would personally define facts. In the TOK course, we know that knowledge is produced when someone proposes a knowledge claim, which is subsequently justified or disproven by suitable evidence. This title essentially asks of you to decide whether "facts" by themselves are sufficient evidence for us to prove a claim to be true, and hence consider it knowledge.

You may think that you have a good understanding of what 'facts' are. You have seen quick facts, cold facts, fun facts, etc... all pointing to little nuggets of information which we consider true. The question is though, how did they become true in the first place? In some areas of knowledge, 'facts' are pretty obvious. 1 + 1 = 2 is a true fact within the area of Mathematics. A Helium atom has 2 protons is a fact within the Natural Sciences. However, what constitutes facts in the Arts, History or Human Sciences?

Every single AOK has a different way of producing and dealing with 'facts'. Mathematics has their foundational axioms, the most basic set of facts that sets out how the whole AOK itself works so that things like 1 + 2 = 2 + 1 is true without us having to prove it. From there, mathematical knowledge builds upon these axioms and into a variety of sub disciplines within the AOK, developing into things like the Pythagoras Theorem or the triangle inequality, etc. Natural Science research nowadays builds upon the research done in the past. So knowledge we know to be true from before is applied to further what is to be known within the AOK to verify new claims. So it seems that perhaps facts play an important role at least in some AOKs, but is it the only requirement to produce new knowledge and justify claims? We know that in natural sciences, we tend to experiment and observe to ultimately prove or disprove a hypothesis. Without experimentation, and only using the facts we already know, it seems a bit tricky to further what we know!

I encourage you to revisit the TOK 101 page and find out more about the different stages of knowledge. Consider how facts are important in each stage of knowledge, but focusing primarily on how knowledge is produced in each AOK. How does knowledge evolve in each AOK? Can it develop organically solely from the facts we have now or does it require some additional input from other types of evidence?

The title is very specific, requiring discussion of mathematics and arts inline with the quote. It seems to propose that mathematics shares similar artistic properties with the arts (with examples such as paintings and poetry). You may have heard of the saying that Mathematics is a beautiful language or something to that effect. There have been discussions on the internet that beyond high school mathematics, mathematics can develop into quite a creative and artistic discipline. Mathematics has been used to creatively construct art! One obvious example (thus one that you probably shouldn't use in your essay) is fractals :

You can read more about the mathematical patterns behind fractals, but it is one artistic representation of mathematics.

While this prompt seems quite abstract at first, it does raise a good question about the intentions of producing knowledge in each AOK. Is it the purpose of the Arts to 'look pretty' and make us go "WOW that's so beautiful"? Conversely, is mathematics meant to be function first, form second or vice versa?

There are plenty of examples where art isn't meant to be pretty. There is a famous photograph of the chaos and brutality of the Vietnam war that is pretty infamous (do a quick google search!). Even if it isn't beautiful in the traditional sense, can it be considered beautiful in another perspective, especially considering the intention of why this was produced and what knowledge this produced? Similarly, mathematics tends to have the association that it is practical to real life and helps us solve some problems. Does mathematics have value if mathematical knowledge is produced without an immediate benefit or application? This is the world that pure mathematicians live in. While applied mathematicians can directly show their relevance and practicality of produced knowledge, it might not always be 'beautiful' in the artistic sense, but it can be 'beautiful' in its ability to capture the complex world. At the same time, if mathematics is purely beautiful in a satisfying sense (think when you factorise a quadratic and how it simplifies down to something solvable), but with no immediate practicality, is it still worth producing?

The key to this prompt is not to dispute the notion of the given quote. Yes, I know it's probably not the best quote, but think about the variations of how you can interpret the quote, rather than being either for or against the quote.

This title might be very appealing to students. I'm sure we have all experienced the importance of good scientific communication from trusted experts during the pandemic. We based our behaviour on them. When they told us to stay home, we (mostly) did, and we followed advice to get vaccinated, etc. At the other end of the spectrum, there are some that are completely ignorant of expert advice, calling this pandemic a hoax, and the vaccine a conspiracy. While there is common consensus that this ignorance is very dangerous, this prompt is quite interesting in prompting us to think about whether we should be trusting these experts completely, especially when the stakes are so high!

Experts often get things wrong, and when they do, we hope they will admit it readily even if it hurts their credibility. Credibility is key for us to accept expert advice. So this raises an important point - what makes an expert? Is it truly a person with the most knowledge about a topic or who is PERCEIVED to be so? Ideally, experts fit both of those criteria, but sometimes it is one or the other. At the same time, are experts immune from bias and other common human failures? NO! Then again, even if they have their failings, we can think about what is our level of tolerance for expert opinions and 'going at it alone' by not trusting them at all.

The prescribed AOK of human sciences is quite interesting. As you know, we are some complex people. Economists are either praised or blasted for their predictions about the economy all the time! Do you listen to economists about their market predictions? There is a joke that there will always be an economist somewhere in the world saying a recession is imminent no matter how the actual economy is doing. Can we really capture something as complex as humanity and let some experts give us advice that we trust to be 100%, unfailingly true? That doesn't seem to be wise. At the same time, it also doesn't seem wise that when 99% of economists warn us that inflation is getting out of hand for us to do nothing about it. So is it a numbers game? As more 'experts' say the same thing, and corroborate each other, we have a confidence to trust them unquestionably?

Ultimately, the conclusion seems pretty clear from the get go for this prompt. It is almost always unwise to just trust something or someone 100% and also unwise to go to the other extreme. While we can be tempted to do so, it is important we maintain a critical lens. If you are tackling this title, focus on the nuance between these two extremes presented, and show that both share common flaws in their approach to how knowledge is considered and acquired.

This prompt starts with the assumption that knowledge is produced according to the values of the producers. To what extent this is a problem is the issue here at hand here. First think of how knowledge is influenced by values. There was once a time when slavery was considered acceptable, and if you look all literary works around that time, it wouldn't be unusual to see examples of such and the use of what we now consider inappropriate language when referring to African-Americans, for example. Social values do change over time, examples including gay marriage, sexualisation and nudity of the body, dealing with minorities and racism, and even climate change. In some AOKs, this may be more apparent (i.e. History and the Arts) but what of something like mathematics? Can societal values influence them too?

When discussing whether this is problematic, other than considering the extent that values influence knowledge, also consider the implications this has on the perspectives of knowledge that are made available. Who determines these values is also of contention. This brings to mind propaganda and the various ways the 'values' of some power behind knowledge creation can greatly distort the knowledge that is produced. You may have some ideas on the problems that arise when we bring our values into the knowledge we produce, but to some extent this is inevitable. After all, the knowledge we produce simply reflects what we are interested in learning about, and willing to discover more of. The question is, how does each AOK handle changing values over time?

Every AOK has a different way of handling changing values. Long ago, we believed that we were the centre of the earth. How did the Natural Sciences overcome this long held belief? Conversely, how do we ensure that history remains accurate and isolated from the potential bias that could be introduced due to the values of the people that first wrote it? In History, revisionism describes the process of how we reevaluate history consistently to ensure that we always have the most accurate depiction of the past according to our current lens. There will be a time when our lens becomes outdated in the future, so what is the role of the Historian? Remember, knowledge is rarely ever fixed or 'done'. There is always more to know and more to discover, so how WE view knowledge in the past, and how someone in the future views the knowledge we make now will have large implications on the approach we take when producing knowledge. How can you ensure that someone interpreting knowledge in the future won't misconstrue what we are trying to say now? Could having differing interpretations according to different values be a benefit?

For some AOKs, the issue of values isn't that prominent. Why is that the case? It is good to explore in this title, the reasoning behind why values often influence the knowledge we produce, how we decide to mitigate or deal with this reality and how these approaches to do so differ between AOKs according to the nature that the knowledge is initially produced and then now consumed.

Is it always the case that "the world isn't just the way it is, it is how we understand it - and in understanding something, we bring something to it" (adapted from Life of Pi by Yann Martel)? Discuss with reference to history and the natural sciences.

In some less convoluted English, this prompt essentially asks whether we colour the knowledge we acquire and bring our own perspectives and interpretation to knowledge. If you think this is quite abstract, think about this example: you have likely done a book report before. It will almost always ask you what you thought of the book and people will have different thoughts. This demonstrates the essence of this title! We all have our own thoughts and ideas about the knowledge we acquire. When we learn new things, we might put our own spin to it, and try and explain it to ourselves and our friends in our own unique way. So, it is likely that there are some cases where this idea of us bringing our own ideas into the knowledge we acquire is valid, but there maybe other times that this doesn't happen. As with most things in TOK, there is a spectrum of the extent in which we 'bring something' to the things we learn.

Some AOKs actively encourage this sort of self-inquisition. While artists probably created their art to have a specific meaning, you are often encouraged to come up with your own interpretation of the art, as it may mean something very personal to you according to your background and life experiences. No one person would interpret a work the same way as you, and that is how the AOK of Art intends it. So clearly, some AOKs encourage this sort of interpretation, why might they do so? On the other hand, some AOKs require some very exact and objective interpretation of evidence and knowledge, so it might be that this sort of malleability when we acquire it is undesired. What issues do you foresee might arise when we bring our own interpretation to knowledge acquired? How each AOK deals with the idea of bring our own perspectives into acquired knowledge speaks a lot about its intention and purpose.

The prompt also asks us to consider whether we are really getting the knowledge of the 'true world as it is' or just the way we perceive the world. This is most prominent in the natural sciences where we try to observe the natural world by attempting to minimise our effects on it. We are effective at doing so to various extents, but can we ever really observe something as they are? Similarly, and perhaps even more difficult for the Human Sciences, how can you observe a human being's behaviour knowing that they are being watched, or that they are participating in an experiment? Does this invalidate any findings within the human sciences because we know we might be involved in it? In most cases, knowledge is generated from the lens of humanity - individuals like us! And for the most part, it is consumed by individuals like us as well. Can we ever have knowledge that is independent of humanity so that we are really watching the world as it is, rather than having our own input on it?

Big data and data science is a hot field right now because of exactly this problem - we have too much data and we don't really know how to handle it! You might have experienced this personally during your studies in the IB. Out of a 500 page textbook, what will you choose to learn? You likely won't know every exact detail within that textbook for your exams, but you will understand the key points as it pertains to the syllabus and the key techniques that you need to answer exam problems. In a similar way, people select knowledge they wish to acquire all the time. With the advent of search engines and wikipedias, there are limitless amounts of knowledge to be known, but only so much that we want to know. So it makes sense to ask ourselves, what criteria do we use to select what information we choose to get, what knowledge to acquire? That is the essence of the title.

When we choose some knowledge and leave out others, does this create any risk? What if we were missing out on some important perspectives? We must all have experienced a familiar feeling of thinking we are prepared for an exam, but it turns out that we missed a crucial part of the topic and subsequently bombed the exam. Now imagine this effect magnified to more important applications - in the medical context, how can medical professionals make the most informed decision for their patients? It is not like they can consider all possible available scenarios and knowledge about their condition! Again, it goes to what we consider to be important for us to acquire and so let's think deeply about why we learn some things over other things. Is it interest that is driving us? Practicality?

Finally, one last thing to consider for this topic is what is the point of having more knowledge if most are going to be selected away?

So hopefully these explanations have helped you in deconstructing what initially might appear to be some intimidating prompts! Before you write your essay, make sure you plan it out and select good examples to back up your points. Check out some 10/10 TOK essay examples and identify their strengths will help a lot as well!

Recent Posts

November 2024 TOK Essay Prescribed Titles with Examples and Detailed Explanation

How to learn TOK

TOK 101: Areas of Knowledge Explained

Comentarios

IB TOK Essay Titles

The International Baccalaureate Organization releases six TOK essay titles, twice a year for submission either in May or November. So you need to know which cohort you're submitting with. The essay titles for submission in May are released in the previous September. The essay titles for submission in November are released the previous March.

• November 2023 topics
• May 2023 topics
• November 2022 topics
• May 2022 topics
• November 2021 topics
• May 2021 topics
• November 2020 topics
• May 2020 topics
• November 2019 topics
• May 2019 topics
• November 2018 topics
• May 2018 topics
• November 2017 topics

• About Dr Phil Joyce
• Standard of Service
• Terms of Engagement

• Philosophy Degrees by Distance Learning
• Critical Thinking Tutor
• Oxbridge Application Tutor
• Logic Tutor
• University Philosophy Application Advice

May 2023 TOK Essay Prompts + SAMPLES and Suggestions

Table of contents

• Writing Metier

Every year, students anxiously wait for the IB to announce the TOK essay topics. So this year is not an exception; IBO has also announced 2023 May titles for IB TOK essay. The TOK essay can be quite a challenging one to write for most students. Therefore it’s extremely important to select a TOK essay topic that suits you better.

UPD! November 2023 TOK essay prompts released!

Most students struggle with the idea of writing a TOK essay since it can indeed be very tough owing to its different structure. Most students plan for days on end so that they can see just the proper structure in mind, with suitable examples so that they can give their best to what they are doing.

Btw… ⏩ We can write a ToK essay for you ⏪

To be able to score well, you need to plan accordingly. The idea is to make sure to do a great job and that can only happen when you know what exactly is expected of you and how you get through that. To better understand the TOK essay and have ample considerations, here is the list of TOK essay titles for May 2023 explained by professional IB writers.

You can get a few ideas from here about how you’re supposed to work on these. With these ideas, you are sure to do a sound job with your TOK essay . Furthermore, you will find links for 2 different May 2023 TOK essay samples that were written by our IB experts. Feel free to use them for inspiration.

TOK essay titles and questions for May 2023

Below you will find an updated list of TOK essay prompts for the May 2023. We have also added some suggestions from our expert TOK essay writers for your ease. Enjoy reading 😉

Is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

In this essay, it is important to focus on the world’s replicability. Next, the distinction between necessary and sufficient requirements need to be made. After that, the focus should be on how objectivity is related to replicability. You can give examples of several experiments that have been done and whether or not they have been replicated.

In line with your thought process, you can further work towards explaining that in further detail and making your point much clearer this way. Based on the examples you give, you can also talk about the different ways of knowing, which can help you explain this in a much better way, in line with the requirements of IB.

For artists and natural scientists, which is more important: what can be explained or what cannot be explained? Discuss with reference to the arts and the natural sciences.

With this title, you can see that there are two areas of knowledge already given. This means that you don’t have a free hand to choose topics yourself. You essentially have to differentiate between what can be explained and what cannot. Some things are easier to explain, whereas others aren’t. Using examples from art and natural sciences, you can offer your explanation here.

The examples you choose need to be as such that it makes it much easier for you to make that distinction. Once you do that, select your ways of knowing as well so that you can comply with the IB requirements .

Does it matter if our acquisition of knowledge happens in “bubbles” where some information and voices are excluded? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

In this essay, the main focus is on bubbles. The idea is to explore what bubbles mean in this context. We can see that “bubbles” here refers to knowledge that is subjective in all ways. The idea is to explore whether or not knowledge can be subjective in all ways or whether it can be objective as well. This is important to understand in all contexts first. Subjective and objective knowledge can be explored using different areas of knowledge.

However, the areas of knowledge should be selected based on the fact that it should be very easy to make that switch and understand how these two differ in context. Additionally, you can also shed light on what is required to share another person’s perspective on the situation. It is only once you know you can make that distinction as clear as ever.

Do you agree that it is “astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power” (Bertrand Russell)? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

In this essay, the main focus has to be on this quote given. The idea is to see how knowledge can give us power. We have always heard how knowledge can make us powerful. Here, the idea is to see how that can happen using several different examples.

One area of knowledge is already given. The other area of knowledge is up to your choice. So based on that, you need to choose examples that will help you understand this better. You can talk about how these two areas of knowledge have allowed us to make the most of our lives, which is how we have become so powerful.

Below you will find a May 2023 TOK essay sample completed by our IB experts at WritingMetier.com

Are visual representations always helpful in the communication of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics.

Here, the main focus needs to be on visual representation and how they represent the truth in most situations. The idea is to see what these visual representations are and how they allow for the communication of knowledge to happen in the best way possible. You also have to make the distinction between practical and theoretical knowledge here.

As you can see, two areas of knowledge are already given here: human sciences and mathematics. So you have to make use of these only and use relevant examples to explain this.

To what extent is the knowledge we produce determined by the methodologies we use? Discuss with reference to history and one other area of knowledge.

The main keyword here that you need to focus on is methodologies. You have to speak about what methodologies are and how they allow you to understand things in the best possible way. You need to use history as one area of knowledge, and you can choose the other area of knowledge yourself.

The idea is to help you understand this in the best way possible so that you can make a clear point about how the methodologies employed helped you get to this conclusion.

And again, sharing an example of an APA format IB TOK essay on title #6 that can be used as a guide. Yes, it’s also written by one of our expert IB TOK writers, and if you want, you can get assistance from these writers no matter the urgency of your task.

If you might have missed some of the previous TOK essay titles with samples or topics for previous years, below I’m sharing the links.

The year 2022:

• November 2022 TOK essay prompts
• May 2022 ToK essay titles

Previous years’ prompts:

• November 2021 ToK Essay titles
• May 2021 Theory of Knowledge essay prompts

Choose IB TOK essay topic wisely, my friend 😉

With these suggestions and explanations for each May 2023 TOK essay topic, you can write a good TOK essay!  If you are facing tough deadlines and want someone to lend you a hand – WritingMetier.com is here to help.

You can always buy a custom TOK essay that will be written under your instructions and following one of the May 2023 prompts. Not forgetting about the latest changes in the IB criteria.

We can guarantee this because we have been in the IB writing services business for 4+ years now and have already completed hundreds of different IB papers. Order your essay now and get a 5% discount.

Free topic suggestions

Vasy kafidoff.

Vasyl Kafidoff is a co-founder and CEO at WritingMetier. He is interested in education and how modern technology makes it more accessible. He wants to bring awareness about new learning possibilities as an educational specialist. When Vasy is not working, he’s found behind a drum kit.

Similar posts

November 2023 tok essay prompts explained + samples.

This article is a complete guide to the November 2023 TOK essay prompts, which includes detailed explanations of each prompt along with samples to help students understand them better. It offers practical advice and expert guidance to help students improve their writing skills and succeed in this important assignment. Whether you need help selecting a topic or want to enhance your critical thinking skills, this article provides valuable insights that will help you craft a successful TOK essay.

IB ToK Essay Prompts for November 2022

Every year, students who started IBDP are waiting for IB to share the list of specific prescribed titles for Theory of Knowledge essays. Like in all the previous years, IB opened a list of six topics for TOK essays for the next semester.

ToK Essay Titles November 2021 | Explained + SAMPLES

In this article, we will be talking about the six Theory of knowledge essay topics students enrolled in the IB diploma need to be aware of. Just like every year, this TOK November’s topics vary in different elements, and in this article, we will share descriptions about each topic which the students need to keep in their minds when selecting the essay topic for their diplomas.

30 Different TOK Presentation Topic Ideas to Succeed in IB

Given that the TOK essay's structure and the presentation are unlike others, students can find it challenging to proceed with it. You can only do well on the TOK presentation if you have an excellent idea.

AOK and WOK in TOK Essays | Detailed Guide

Areas of knowledge and ways of knowing are two essential concepts that you need first to understand before you begin working on these. To find out more about areas of knowledge and ways of knowing, continue reading!

How to Write a Good TOK Essay | Steps & Tips

What is a TOK essay? A TOK essay is also known as a theory of knowledge essay. It is usually written when doing an IB diploma. The essay is a comparative one that discusses problems using various different sources of knowledge. If you’re wondering how to write a TOK essay, then there are a few things that you need to keep in mind for it.

We rely on cookies to give you the best experince on our website. By browsing, you agree to it. Read more

May 2023 TOK essay prescribed titles

The prescribed titles for the May 2023 TOK essay have been released. Check with your TOK coordinator / teacher for the official document.

Resources for the May 2023 TOK essay prescribed titles will be published shortly.

• Is replicability necessary in the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.
• For artists and natural scientists, which is more important: what can be explained or what cannot be explained? Discuss with reference to the arts and the natural sciences.
• Does it matter if our acquisition of knowledge happens in “bubbles” where some information and voices are excluded? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.
• Do you agree that it is “astonishing that so little knowledge can give us so much power” (Bertrand Russell)? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.
• Are visual representations always helpful in the communication of knowledge? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and mathematics.
• To what extent is the knowledge we produce determined by the methodologies we use? Discuss with reference to history and one other area of knowledge.

Privacy Overview

EXPLAINED: May 2024 TOK Essay Prescribed Titles

What happened to this post? HackIB has been acquired by MyIBTutor . All content is now available on the MyIBTutor Blog with more exciting IB content to come! Click here to see it for yourself!

Looking for November 2024 Session TOK Essay titles? Click here.

TOK Essay Titles – May 2024 Examination Session

The titles for May 2024 are released! Here they are below:

Make sure to bookmark this page as I explain and provide examples for each of these titles in depth! UPDATE: Title 1, 2, 5 and 6 are now available. Stay tuned for more! For general guidance on how to write a good TOK essay, check out my TOK Essay advice collection .

Is subjectivity overly celebrated in the arts but unfairly condemned in history? Discuss with reference to the arts and history.

How can we reconcile the opposing demands for specialization and generalization in the production of knowledge? Discuss with reference to mathematics and one other area of knowledge.

Nothing is more exciting than fresh ideas, so why are areas of knowledge often so slow to adopt them? Discuss with reference to the human sciences and one other area of knowledge.

Do we underestimate the challenges of taking knowledge out of its original context and transferring it to a different context? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

Do we need custodians of knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.

Are we too quick to assume that the most recent evidence is inevitably the strongest? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and one other area of knowledge.

This title attempts to challenge students on the main school of thought that you learn over the TOK course. The gist of your TOK teaching on both of these AOKs probably boiled down to something like: everything is art and it’s just whatever the artist wants to create, while history is always biased because the winners always write all of history. However, this eliminates much of the nuance in each of these AOKs that are worth exploring. That’s what makes this prompt interesting.

Is subjectivity overly celebrated in the arts? I will be honest, I never thought we really ‘celebrated’ subjectivity. It just, was. Inherently, art is a subjective exercise – you can think about this point a little further. You will find some heated discussion on whether art is subjective or could it be objective on the internet and I won’t delve into that here, because it isn’t the point of this title. The key here is to focus on the EXTENT of subjectivity and is it to the detriment of the area of knowledge itself. Then, we have to consider, whose subjectivity are we talking about: is it the artist’s subjectivity, or the audience’s subjectivity. For example, the Mona Lisa wasn’t that well known when it was first painted. I’m sure the Da Vinci thought it was quite a nice piece, but it seems like we didn’t really celebrate his subjectivity. It wasn’t until a certain audience found it subjectively good, that we accepted it as one of the greatest pieces of art in the world! That is an example of how subjectivity is relevant in the dissemination of artistic knowledge. For a more modern example, what about your favourite YouTuber? Do they truly make what they want? NO! They are often beholden to sponsors, and you – the audience! What you want to see, is what they will make! So it is YOUR subjectivity that drives their decision to produce art, not necessarily purely their subjectivity. Subjectivity by definition is just a person’s opinions, emotions, thoughts. This connects well with the TOK concept of values. What VALUES and WHOSE values are determining what art is created (in a variety of contexts), how art is perceived, and how art changes in its reception over time? These are all good questions to ponder. For more unconventional examples about art, think about how museums choose what art to display, what constitutes good art for prizes like the Nobel Prize for Literature, or why some art is considered more expensive than others? Are there systematic ways to think about our subjectivity and how we apply it to art? Is it really overly celebrating subjectivity or simply a necessity to make sense of the abundance of artistic knowledge in a sea of information today?

History gets a bad rep in the TOK classroom. Students like to trash on History calling it biased and unreliable. In this prompt, I don’t want you to refute these claims, but just think about how they aren’t necessarily catastrophic as we might think. We aren’t denying that biases in history could be problematic. I would be suspicious too, if the only accounts of the Rohingya Genocide came from the Myanmar military. However, the word condemned in the title suggests that we might be too harsh on historians when they get things wrong. We should focus on how the historical method recovers itself from failures in biases from its sources. Yes, it might be biased, but is it better than no history? Furthermore, does subjectivity actually ADD value to the way we produce, and interpret historical knowledge? While I’m sure a completely objective, news story like report of what happened in 1886 would be a historian’s dream, that isn’t the case! No matter how objective we try to be, we colour the events we experience by our own opinions, feelings and emotions. But isn’t that history in itself? In an almost cliched way, history’s subjectivity tells us more about what happened in the past and their beliefs and values more than words could ever say.

In both the historical and artistic discussions, you should focus more on the methodologies of these AOKs and how they achieve their AOK’s purpose. Subjectivity manifests in different ways in these AOKs and their methodology reflects that. In the overt awareness of subjectivity in the Arts, its method to produce knowledge is characteristically defined by subjectivity. In History, the method is to identify the covert influences of subjectivity, then to produce the most truthful knowledge possible. You can see that the goals of these two are different, and hence they deal with subjectivity differently. Don’t fall in the trap of focusing your discussion too much on your examples, but generalise to the patterns of how subjectivity manifest in your AOKs and whether their treatment of it is problematic.

It is crucial, when writing the essay for this prompt, to clearly define in your introduction what specialisation and generalisation means. DO NOT use the dictionary definitions here – since this is a TOK Essay, you want to make a TOK version of specialisation and generalisation, in terms of how these two things differ in the production of knowledge. Clearly defining the two in this way will form a solid foundation for you to have a nuanced discussion on this process of reconciliation between the two. The prompt hints at the competing demands on knowledge of specialisation and generalisation – i.e. you might not be able to produce knowledge in the same way if you were aiming for specialisation versus generalisation. So, this provides a point of contrast for you to choose examples and frame your discussion. Remember, the idea of competing demands is an ASSUMPTION, not an argument posed by the question. You should focus on how your chosen examples demonstrate a way to balance the interests of both and reach a ‘middle-ground’ rather than arguing that specialisation or generalisation are compatible with each other. TLDR: Don’t challenge the assumption.

For the first AOK of Mathematics, you should have encountered many personal examples just from your study of IB Maths. Most of your learning has been on generalisation, and the application of such generalisations. For instance, you learn about Calculus, a general topic within Mathematics, and then apply it in various contexts. Mathematicians love generalisations – that Calculus you learned? Well, the definition of a derivative generalised for all functions could be summarised by the first principles of derivatives function that HL AA students learn. You would have less interaction with specialisation of Mathematical knowledge. In a broader sense, the specific components of mathematics, cannot be separated from the general. You can’t solve calculus problems without the fundamental theorem of calculus. However, you could argue that the fundamental theorem of calculus didn’t need calculus problems to exist. Thus, an interesting dilemma arises in Mathematics – the generalisation could be produced, without a particular need for specialisation, but specialisation often calls for generalisation to first exist.

Looking at the latest mathematics research, you will find that applied mathematics is most common. Rarely do you see people get excited by new discoveries of solutions to elliptical curves, but more do when you tell them a new mathematical model to improve our prediction of the weather. We may place greater value on specialisation of knowledge, because we could see its usefulness more immediately, but, the Area of Knowledge does not require such specialisation to produce knowledge. So, do we encourage people to produce knowledge with the goal of specialisation in mind, or do we tell them to produce whatever theoretical generalised mathematical knowledge they can? Look to how mathematics is applied to Quantitative Finance, Econometrics, and Actuarial Science. They specialise mathematical knowledge and provide for some of the most lucrative careers. Does that speak to our preference and demand for specialised knowledge? But then again, what of the interdependence between generalisation and specialisation? How do we balance the two and how does the methodologies of the AOK contribute to this balancing act?

For the second, complimentary AOK, you could have discussions with all of the AOKs. For the Sciences, you could present a similar argument about needing to have some general theories before you could specialise. The scientific method is essentially one big generalisation process – you take specific observations and you make inferences so that you can generalise about some natural process. However, the knowledge that produces need not be general, it can still be specific. If we take specialisation as the goal, then we could pose narrow hypotheses to test. If we take generalisation as the goal, then we might need multiple of these narrow hypotheses to form a full picture, testing each individual case. Thus, specialisation could lead to specialisation alone, but more often, generalisation is the result of many specialisations.

One last question you might want to consider and attempt to answer in your essay is, do you want to know something about everything or everything about something? The answer to that will depend on your AOK. While we want to know about everything on everything, that is simply not reality. So, what trade offs do we make in each AOK, and how does each AOK decide on what we need to know more on?

You might be able to appreciate how long it takes ideas to actually be implemented in reality by looking at the recent Nobel Prize winners for Economic Sciences. The winner of the 2017 prize was Richard H. Thaler, for his contributions to behavioural economics. He explored the impacts of limited rationality, social preferences and the lack of individual self-control on economic decision making on an individual and market level. He started these findings from the 1980s, but it is only recently, in the 2022 revision of the IB syllabus that Economics students learn about the field of Behavioural economics in any detail! So why is it so?

To some extent, it is hard to criticise things for moving slowly. After all, new discoveries like behavioural economics represents a fundamental paradigm shift towards the way research is conducted in the particular AOK. Often times, fresh ideas are left to “ferment” so that their truthfulness can be tested with time. Nothing is more embarrassing than going down a rabbit hole only to find that your assumptions turned out to be monumentally incorrect. Even if we are making a big shift in light of new ideas towards the way we produce knowledge, doing so takes time! For many years and still now, we rely on strong assumptions of rationality to make economic models function. While the psychology of such behaviours are well researched, applying them to an Economic setting may not be. That is to say, it is important to consider how these new ideas arise, and what effect it has on existing knowledge, and the way we produce future knowledge. New ideas is simply new knowledge, but with the added implication that it has some effect on the existing knowledge within an AOK. It could potentially change how we view current knowledge, or how we conduct research given a particular discovery.

In the AOK of the human sciences, which broadly follows the scientific method, you could drawn some inspiration from the philosopher Thomas Kuhn’s view of scientific progress. He argues that within a period of “normal science” where we make incremental progress under the assumption of an overarching model, but there comes a point where we notice accumulation of imperfections with such a model that leads to new paradigms – new ideas, that fundamentally change how we do science. Then we undergo a sort of scientific revolution, where there are debates and decisions made over what sort of model we need to follow, until everyone eventually accepts the new paradigm and returns to a normal science period so that continual small improvements are made to knowledge, until another paradigm shift happens again. While you are not expected to demonstrate such strong philosophy knowledge within the TOK Essay, it is helpful to consider how each AOK handles such ‘revolutions’. For instance, it is harder to irrefutably find falsities in human sciences given the difficulty in replicability and corroborative studies compared to natural sciences.

As for complimentary AOKs, any would suit here, as each AOK has a very different way to handle new ideas. Many factors influence the way new ideas is accepted. For this title, we need to take the assumption that their acceptance is slow, not argue with it. Instead, you should consider what factors influence this slowness, and how different AOKs have different factors in mind when deciding how to accept new ideas. This relates to the nature of the AOK (what is its purpose) and the methodology guiding knowledge production in them.

Have you ever said something that sounds very weird out of context? That might have just been something silly with no real consequences, but in the realm of knowledge, we need to be careful about the consequences of knowledge taken out of their original context. This article highlights how the context of medical treatment matters a lot! As you can imagine, something that works in one field, doesn’t always apply in a straightforward manner to another. This is why there are whole research teams dedicated to what we call “translational research”. That is, trying to “translate” what you get from something like a lab setting, into actual products, like life-saving medications.

The obvious links to AOKs here are the Natural and Human Sciences. For Natural Sciences, we often start off knowledge production in a lab setting, or in a controlled environment. However, the application of such knowledge is rarely as controlled! So an interesting point to consider is how natural scientists have to account for the fact that their findings won’t ever be used in as perfect a setting as their research. Sure, you might have developed bullet proof wood , but how is that going to work in practically when it comes to mass manufacturing it for the army or the police? This is one of the biggest challenges that natural scientists face. It’s not that we aren’t trying to produce exciting knowledge, but that the application of such knowledge in a practical and appreciable context is often very difficult. Something like the mRNA technology (which recently was awarded a Nobel) took a long time to be developed into actual vaccines. The question then is, do we underestimate this process? Often it depends on the goal of the scientist. If the knowledge producer set out with an idea to commercialise in mind, then they would often consider the practical implications of findings. However, people studying theoretical physics for example, would struggle to immediately find very accessible real life implications. That doesn’t mean the knowledge is worthless, but certainly, the challenges are there.

What about non-scientific disciplines? Recently, I went to an art exhibition that trend Van Gough’s paintings into a 3D digital display. There was a Banksy exhibition that took the original murals he painted on the street, into this museum environment. Does changing the context of how art work is shown, and the manipulation of artistic knowledge change its meaning? What is the goal of transforming art into a different context? There are many reasons. Sometimes, it is to create satire (have a look at the parodies of the Mona Lisa), bringing old art onto a new audience (like VR exhibitions of Da Vinci), or simply making it more accessible to people (by making art works digitally available). The producers of these adapted forms of knowledge take great care in considering how this impacts the meaning of the art in its changed form. When artwork is so subjective, the context of art is often required to understand the artist’s meaning and intention, to ‘interpret’ works accordingly. At the same time, as we know art is quite subjective, is a ‘correct interpretation’ always required? If we are to remain artistic purists, then many of the joys of art could be lost! Imagine if you were admonished for listening to Taylor Swift through Spotify on your AirPods because it isn’t the original uncompressed music file with all the details, and you aren’t listening to it on the exact set of thousand dollar speakers it was created with? It would be ludicrous to assume that artistic knowledge is always going to be disseminated in the same context. Thus, this must be a consideration of artists. Is this consideration more or less difficult for different types of art? How is this consideration different to science considering there is no ‘right’ answer to interpreting art?

When thinking about this title, we aren’t arguing whether it is difficult. I think we all agree it is. However, it is about whether we underestimate just how difficult it is! Center your focus on how each AOK’s methodology highlights the consideration of being able to change contexts, and whether that affects the interpretation of the knowledge in question.

The term ‘custodians of knowledge’ is not something TOK students have likely heard of before, but this concept is relatively simple to understand. If you think positively about it, it could be protectors of knowledge, people who preserve knowledge, keeping it for generations to come – for example, some people might consider the Indigenous Peoples’ in Australia to be custodians of their unique cultural knowledge and what they call dreamtime stories. In this way, they keep culture alive, even if most people nowadays speak English and don’t readily tell their history. However, thought about negatively, it could also mean “gatekeepers’ (pardon the Gen Z language) of knowledge. The idealogical “protection” of knowledge could also be seen as a way to prevent some forms of knowledge from becoming knowledge in the first place. Talk to any university academic, and they will tell you how many times their research papers have been rejected. That’s why there is a bias towards statistically significant results, while research that showed that nothing significant has happened doesn’t often get published. Thus, these two contrasts provide for interesting discussion, particularly when considering how each AOK has different forms of custodians of knowledge and how they “gatekeep” or “protect” knowledge in different ways.

Take the AOK of the arts as an example. The career of artists are laughed upon because it is so hard to “break in” to the fine world of art. Many artists aren’t acclaimed until they are long dead. Perhaps most famously, the Mona Lisa wasn’t very well known until several hundred years after it was made. Thus, artists are often at the mercy of custodians of artistic knowledge like art curators and critics, who decide what merits acknowledgement as knowledge. After all, knowledge is only knowledge when there is consensus it is. And if the big wigs in the art industry doesn’t think it’s worth a mention, your art, however brilliant it seems to you, would not reach the consensus required to be considered knowledge. Of course, there are debates on the necessity of custodians in such a subjective AOK. After all, there were many times I questioned how some “artworks” even made it into the modern art museum when it’s literally splashes of paint on a canvas. I digress. However, there is something to be said about maintaining some form of standard to art. We judge whether some art is good or bad, but not in a very rigorous way. Custodians of knowledge supposedly have a framework to make such judgement in a way which preserves the nature of the AOK, and the knowledge within it. Therefore, discussion about the necessity of the custodians should focus on how they contribute to the purpose of the AOK, and whether it is compatible with the nature and methodologies of the AOK.

To further illustrate what I mean, you could see that Natural Sciences might present a stronger argument to the necessity of such custodians. We implicitly “trust” science, for better or for worse, because we know that there is a level of credibility imbued by the scientific method. It is the custodians’ role to maintain the standard of adherence to the scientific method that keeps this credibility alive. This is why, when flat earthers argue that they can’t see the curvature of the earth from the horizon, that it doesn’t get published in a scientific journal as fact! This is why, when research emerges that denies the existence of climate change, custodians have a responsibility to retract such research . However, at the same time, it also places much pressure on producers of such knowledge to create something worthy in the eyes of custodians. You might have heard of the data manipulation scandal that forced Stanford’s president to resign. Thus, custodians do appear quite important in this AOK, when we value the truthfulness of knowledge so much, but that isn’t without its consequences.

I recommend picking two contrasting AOKs that value much different things when writing the essay. While comparison is not a requirement for the essay, it gives you a more nuanced understanding of the question and thus a more reflective piece. For instance, we have just demonstrated that art is relatively subjective, while the sciences are less so. Thus, this influences the role which custodians need to play in each AOK.

The framework to answering this title for many students will follow a similar structure: an example of when novel evidence was accepted and had groundbreaking impacts, and another example where such evidence was problematic and disputed. Repeat this for the second AOK you choose and you’ll have 4 contrasting examples. This is not the only way to approach this title, but is my personal preference considering the structure I suggest to most students that ensures firstly, you will pass the basic criteria of a TOK Essay, and secondly, you will have a strong foundation to succeed. However, since everyone will have a similar style and collection of examples, it is even more important for this title, that you tease out the meaning and the effect on each area of knowledge, and knowledge in general, that your examples represent.

To demonstrate what I mean, let’s focus on two natural sciences examples. First, consider the case of “Cold Fusion”, a theory that you could supposedly have nuclear fusion at room temperature, discovered and subsequently debunked in 1989. A contrasting example, could be recent Nobel Prize winner of Medicine and Physiology, for the research on mRNA vaccines. Immediately, it is obvious that one shows where recent evidence isn’t the strongest, while the latter shows that it could be. But the focus should be on are we TOO QUICK in assuming so, not whether we should or not. Well, what are the reactions and timelines for each example? While Cold Fusion was met with excitement from the general public for the potential it holds for energy production, I wouldn’t say we ‘assumed’ it to be strong. Looking at the news reports from that time, you can see that there was great anticipation about the discovery, leading to lots of sudden funding and interest to investigate it and replicate it. As for mRNA, that discovery took a long time! First the technology, and the getting it to not appear foreign to the human body was very tricky. Even after it was discovered, we waited quite a while, with many people’s first experience with mRNA to be their COVID 19 vaccine. What you need to draw from these two examples is the methodological similarities and differences which reflect the NATURE of Science, and thus, the purpose of science. You see in both how there is an emphasis on replication which corroborates or falsifies, and only after doing so for a long time do we accept it to be true, otherwise it is debunked. So yes, there are moments where Natural Sciences provides strong compelling evidence that ends up false, there are many hurdles with in the methodology of the Natural Science that prevents us from being TOO QUICK to assume it to be true.

For this prompt, it is too easy to fall into the debate of why something was true or why something was false and tricked the population. This is not the point of the essay. You should avoid talking about the specifics of your examples at length. You need to demonstrate how your examples reflect the wider methodologies of the Natural Sciences (and similarly, for your second AOK) that either encourages or discourages our assumptions that novel evidence is always best. As you can see from my examples above, I focused on how such assumption does not happen too quickly because there are many ways we verify scientific knowledge to be true. I don’t discuss the specifics of the actual science behind Cold Fusion or mRNA as that isn’t required. You are better off focusing on the methodologies behind the AOKs themselves and answering the question.

Some interesting complements to the Natural Science AOK could be History (particularly focusing on revisionism and how historical events could be interpreted differently over time), Mathematics (how could the methodologies differ and are there ‘mistakes’ in Maths), or even Human Sciences (replication is a bit more difficult with that!).

Share this:

20 responses to “explained: may 2024 tok essay prescribed titles”.

Hi, when will you deconstruct #6? Much appreciated.

I just did! Hope it helps.

Thank you so much!

hello! when will you deconstruct #2? would really really appreciate it !!!

Just posted!

Hi when will you deconstruct No. 5? Much appreciated.

Could you please deconstruct no5. ?

Check it out!

Please Please deconstruct 5 ASAP, first draft due in 5 days!!!! Thanks!

I just did! It’s a very interesting title.

Hi, when will you deconstruct #3? Much appreciated.

I have just posted this. Thanks!

Hi, when will you deconstruct #4? Thanks!

Just updated!

Hi, is there more in depth analysis of title 4 coming?

Sorry it took a while, but it’s here now!

I have a question, for PT3, so what will be our possible counterclaim? is it another factor that will make it slow? or find another RLS that show sometimes fresh ideas can be adopted fast ?

I would reread the prescribe title. The title is asking you “why”. So all you need to do is propose different sorts of reasons as to why this slowness occurs. You don’t need to challenge the assumption within the title that it is slow. Accept that it is slow, and propose various ideas for why that is the case according to the properties of your chosen AOK.

Could you explain how you would format number One. Would I only be talking about two examples one for each AOK and what about them? Introduction, aok 1 and aok2 and conclusions

For sure! You should refer to my article on structuring for TOK Essay for more details. In general though, you can approach this prompt with two examples for each AOK, with one example about subjectivity being overly celebrated, and one not in the arts, while for history, it would be one where it is condemned unfairly vs not.

Leave a comment Cancel reply

• Already have a WordPress.com account? Log in now.
• Subscribe Subscribed
• Copy shortlink
• Report this content
• View post in Reader
• Manage subscriptions
• Collapse this bar