This is first of all a reminder that your contributions to the blog will be taken into account when semester grades are awarded. I notice that only a minority of you have responded to last week’s question. Those who have responded have made some great points, so why not take the chance to join them by making your contribution now?
In the mean time, we need to post the next question of the week. This time we are going to take a slightly different approach – please read on carefully.
Here is a Theory of Knowledge essay title:
Compare the roles played by reason and imagination in at least two Areas of Knowledge.
The question is – how would you go about responding to this title?
You would have a word-limit of 1,600. What form would your essay take and why? What would each paragraph be about? What areas of knowledge would you consider and why? How many areas of knowledge should be included? How would you set up comparisons between reason and imagination? How would you explore what these two terms mean? What examples would help? What claims and counterclaims could be made? Let’s explore in a practical way how a title like this could be the springboard for an outstanding essay.
I think this could be a very useful discussion in the build-up to the full-length essays you will be writing very soon…
Friday, March 27, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Comments
38 comments:
First of all, i think it would be important and useful to identify at least two areas of knowledge where both imagination and reason play unprecedented roles. It would also be useful to identify areas of knowledge where either of the two reigns supreme. That way, we can effectively explore the power of both ways of knowing in those areas of knowledge, and compare their roles effectively, if not thoroughly.
In addition, i think it would be very useful to explore the concepts of imaginations and reason before stringing them to areas of knowledge.
For this question, one needs to give a very clear definition of these two terms, reason and imagination. Then mention their importance in the things we do. For areas of knowledge, I would give at least two areas of knowledge where reason and imagination is mostly used (as the question stated). This would help in seeing the clear distinction of the two words as they are complete opposites. Reason has to do with justification and motive and imagination has to do with creativity and the ability to visualize.
Also we can talk about how these two could overlap at certain times and in which areas of knowledge they do overlap. The setbacks of these two terms in our lives should also be discussed. Furthermore, new knowledge issues could be derived from this question such as “Is imagination another way of knowing?” or “Which is a better way of knowing, reason or imagination?”
I havent thought about this thoroughly, but to write an essay like this I would list all the areas of knowledge, under the TOK subject guide and try to place each one under the reasoning and imagination. So, for example, the natural sciences would most probably go under reasoning and the arts under imagination. It will be important to also find the grey areas, i.e the areas of knowledge than use a combination of these two ways.
Subsequently you would need to analyse the pros and cons of the use of reasoning and imagination in each of these two areas of knowledge.
Oh and yeah I agree with hMensa it would probably be useful to actually explain reasoning and imagination and their limitations, etc. This will make it easier to analyse which area of knowledge, produces justified true belief when either reaoning or imagination is used.
Not comprehensive, but....
Now we are underway... Let's take this discussion step by step - here's one issue:
hmensa suggests that we "explore the concepts of imagination and reason"
Fowah says we should "give a very clear definition of these two terms, reason and imagination"
Yazzie offers that "it would probably be useful to actually explain reasoning and imagination..."
Explore, define, explain... Are these the same thing? If not, which is the best approach? Remember that we want to open up the discussion at the start so that we can look at alternatives; not close down the discussion before it gets underway.
And is this explaining, exploring, defining best done by considering the terms in isolation or by setting them in the context of the areas of knowledge that are going to be discussed?
Well first of all i'd select the two areas of knowledge that i'd like to use, moost likely one where i think imagination plays a more easily identifiable role and another where i think it plays a less easily identifiable role. That way i can look at two sides of two coins or something to that effect. So i'd most likely take the Arts and the Natural Sciences. Then i'd take one that i think might be a blend of both, say History. We're at three coins now.
Then I'd discuss imagination and reason and see if parallels may be drawn between the two. After that I'd like to look at all three areas of knowledge what they study and why it is that may be lean more toward imagination than reason and vice versa.
After that i could use specific examples to illustrate what i have attempted to say for each area of knowledge and compare how exactly imagination and reason have played roles.
At this point i think that in every area of knowledge however they play complementary roles. For the life of me i cannot think of an area of knowledge where imagination or reason plays absolutely no part.
Umm so yea that's my two cents....
well three.
i think that imagination is the base for a discovery or invention because it is interesting to consider from where inventions came from!! for instanse the invention of lamp is based on a particular imgination in the early periods before discovery. but we need to be able to give reason to convince others so that they will accept and use the dicovery. therefore, we can deduce that for any invention to occur we need to imgine about it. in fact their is somtimes a discovery incidentally... can we give reason for such cases.. or just accept it.
Source,
You said "I'd most likely take the Arts and the Natural Sciences".
Then: "I'd take one that I think might be a blend of both, say History."
So is this the structure you have in mind?
1) imagination in the arts
2) reason in the natural sciences
3) imagination and reason in history
What do others think about this sequence? It's important that we develop a conversation here rather than each one of us contributing as if s/he he has only read the original post. Only in this way will we make some progress.
Binyam,
What you have done is to try to link the title to some work we have been discussing in class. That is a good idea in principle.
But you have introduced two new concepts into the mix - already we have reason and imagination (and the various areas of knowledge), and now you are adding invention and discovery. What we need to know is how writing about invention and discovery will help us to understand the differences between reason and imagination. You would need to be very clear about this or else it will just confuse your analysis.
I think you would be better off exploring the roles of reason and imagination in chosen areas of knowledge through some real examples (I'm not sure into which area of knowledge your "lamp" example fits!). As you do this, other concepts to be added to the analysis may come to mind, but they are more likely to be useful as they have arisen out of the context required of the title.
I think source's sequence is a bit lacking. According to his sequence, there would not be much of a discussion of reason and imagination, which i think would be like building a house on....well....nothing. I think there should be at least (maybe I'm quite bias) some EXPLORATION (ok am starting to get tired of using that word) on the concepts, which would serve as the substratum of this skysraper essay.
To continue the CONVERSATION on defining, exploring, explaining.....
I'd say it'd be best to do an exploration of the concepts of reason and imagination, which would create a larger round table for interesting discussion of the concepts, rather than closing the doors of the concepts with definitions. An attempt at an explanation of the concepts would more or less be the safari truck of their exploration ( i think I have typed the word 'exploration' far more times than I have ever typed my own name)
i think we also have to consider the difference between the two terms after defining them. i read some where that reason feeds imagination and i was trying to understand it and what i understood was to imagine something, there must be some kind of reasoning.
I indicated that i'd explore reason and imagination in all three but for the arts i'd lean more toward a larger role for imagination and the opposite for the natural sciences, rather than just one for each and both for history. hmensa please go back to my text.
again in the text i talked about exploring both concepts.....
Sorry source.......i actually deleted that post after I reread your text carefully (i hope you saw a deleted post showing somewhere up there) but i dunno how it came up again....sorry for the misunderstandin...
OK, I can see at least two approaches here:
1) Start off (FIRST) exploring, explaining, defining (?) what reason and imagination mean and (THEN) try to apply our findings to various areas of knowledge, or
2) Start off by (FIRST) selecting some areas of knowledge and (THEN) see how reason and imagination fit into them
(I apologize if I have misrepresented anyone's views but we need to make clear distinctions here)
Let's take route 2 for now (I'm not saying it's necessarily better than route 1), narrow it down to Source's structure and see where it leads us.
Source says (I hope!):
1) reason has a larger role than imagination in natural sciences
2) imagination has a larger role than reason in arts
3) both ways of knowing have important roles in history
I think we need to break this task down into pieces.
First piece - what are we going to say about the role of reason in the natural sciences? Let's be a little more specific in our responses now.
Now, I think we are in a position to add mathematics into the fray. Is it possible for imagination to play any role in this area of knowledge?
Reason plays an important role in the natural sciences because we formulate hypotheses and theories based on inductive and deductive reasoning. The scientist makes an observation and designs an feasible experiment that controls variables so that he can obtain knowledge/ information about something specific.
When he obtains results he processes them and presents them in a logical manner from which he can draw conclusions. This is basically how we use reason in the sciences, all the while however especially for the formulation of theories and to 'fix'[for lack of a better word] the gaps in our knowledge we employ imagination and in other ways too imagination comes up in the natural sciences but that question has not come up yet
I also think i would approach it by using route 2 because if one starts by trying to define or explain the key terms it will lead to one limiting themselves to those particular definitions. To answer Mr Kitching we could pick an example of a natural science,(say Chemistry)and note how scientist come to conclusion. i think most probably we would realize that deductive reasoning will be the observed. We could ask ourselves whether using reasoning is enough on it's own and whether it provides us with justifiable answers.
to answer Mr Kidane i think imagination plays an important role in mathematics because for example "if you multiply $100 dollars by 2 you get $200". we accept this because we cannot imangine it otherwise. it is much easier to reason about things we have seen or can imagine rather than those we cannot."If our reasoning leads us to an untrue conclusion, we must revise the picture in our minds, and learn to imagine things as they are.When we find ourselves unable to reason (as one often does when presented with, say, a problem in algebra) it is because our imagination is not touched. One can begin to reason only when a clear picture has been formed in the imagination"(W. W. Sawyer, in his book, Mathematician’s Delight)
- INTRODUCTION
- Define Key terms
- Choose areas of knowlegde
- Justify choice
- FIRST PARAGRAPH
- Discuss role of reasoning the areas of knowledge (strenghts and limitations; identify differences and similarities
- SECOND PARAGRAPH
- Discuss role of imagination in areas of knowledge (strenghts and limitations); identify differences and similarities
- CONCLUSION
- Summarize discussion; identify implications of any knowledge issues that have arisen
You will see how these is executed in the actual essay.
As it has been said defining and clear definition is important.Beside definition we it would be best to analyze the features of imagination and reason in TOK terms.After this i think we should be able to chose more than two areas of knowledge and create a link between Imagination and Reason. i think the body of our essay should have argumentative for, and we have to look at arguments for and against.I am not sure about one THING.IS IT ADVISABLE TO TAKE A STAND IN SUCH AN ARGUMENTATIVE TOK ESSAY ?
As it has been said defining and clear definition is important.Beside definition we it would be best to analyze the features of imagination and reason in TOK terms.After this i think we should be able to chose more than two areas of knowledge and create a link between Imagination and Reason. i think the body of our essay should have argumentative for, and we have to look at arguments for and against.I am not sure about one THING.IS IT ADVISABLE TO TAKE A STAND IN SUCH AN ARGUMENTATIVE TOK ESSAY ?
oh boy, i'm late on this one, i like where it's going though. it would definitely be good to get some definitions laid down to serve as a reference for all you claims/arguments.
I think i would go more with route one, set things out before moving on to instances of their use in the various areas of knowledge.
i think it could also be interesting to look at how the two affect each other, that is does how we reason have any bearing on how far our imagination can go? i don't have any examples on my mind right now... but it's something i would definitely consider in my treatment of this question.
i agree with ThePrez that it would be interesting to look at how the two affect each other but i still maintain that giving definitions will limit you as like ThePrez said you will be compelled to use them as a reference which will not allow you to explore outside the box and i disagree with Melkamu about having clear cut definitions....i think defining comes with restrictions...I presume that words mean different things in different areas of knowledge so maybe imagination might mean a different thing in the natural sciences than in the arts...so defining it in the perspective of one will have obvious implications on how you will tackle the topic...
Thanks for all the contributions so far – there is much to discuss.
Let’s take the issue of definitions for now. Every title contains key words. You are no doubt used to the idea that, when you have a key word, one course of action (almost a reflex!) is to reach for the dictionary. But is this such a good idea in TOK?
Now the key words in this title are REASON and IMAGINATION, and we also need to know what is meant in TOK by AREAS OF KNOWLEDGE. And because REASON also has a specific meaning in TOK we need to be careful not to equivocate - ie use different meanings of the word that are not intended in TOK.
If we go to a dictionary, we might get something like this:
REASON
1) justification: an explanation or justification for something
2) motive: a motive or cause for acting or thinking in a particular way
3) cause that explains something: a cause that explains a particular phenomenon
4) power of orderly thought: the power of being able to think in a logical and rational manner
5) ability to think clearly: the ability to think clearly and coherently
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/reason.html
Does this help us? Well, yes and no (maybe!) - it depends what we do with it. Meanings 2 and 3 need to be discarded because you should know enough about TOK to realise that this is not what we mean by reason in TOK. If you start talking about these things in your essay, you will be in trouble - galloping off in the wrong direction. Meaning 4 seems closest to the mark, and meaning 5 seems relevant as well. Also meaning 1 seems partially relevant because we can justify a decision with reference to reason as a way of knowing, but I’m not so sure about explanation.
One question that comes to mind is – if you already know what we mean by “reason” in TOK then why are we looking up the dictionary at all? Well, one answer might be that it could help us with our conceptual analysis of the term (I say only COULD). If we accept meanings 1, 4 and 5, then we have some other concepts to play around with – justification, explanation, logic, rationality, clarity, coherence. Now how to these concepts relate to reason? At this stage you need to THINK! Get a piece of paper and draw a concept map, like we did back in November. Expand your work to include the other key concepts, like imagination. Make links to areas of knowledge. Identify potential examples...
I hope this account gives you an idea for how a dictionary might be used to OPEN UP possibilities in your mind BEFORE you start to write your essay, rather than used to pin down rigidly the meanings of words in a way that CLOSES DOWN the discussion, or, worse, commits you to meanings that are not appropriate to TOK and the title.
Now you are all intelligent students, and you may not need to use a dictionary as an external source at all in order to play around with a known concept in your mind. The important thing is that we are actively engaging in conceptual analysis of the important terms; not relying on somebody else to provide us with a definition – somebody who has never heard of TOK and is writing the dictionary for entirely different purposes. Don’t quote dictionary definitions in your essay. But you could, if you wanted, use the dictionary to help you expand your range of concepts.
i agree with the idea that reason and imagination mean different things in different areas of knowledge. In mathematics for example, reason might probably be used to come up with theories from already established axioms. This is what exists in Mathematics. However in history, reason is used to interprete facts. Thus reason is not used in the same way in both Mathematics and History. the same thing applies to the use of imagination in History, to fill in the gaps left in historical facts or stories. Thus this is what brings the bias in History as everyone's imagination is different and so their imaginations would feed them with different ideas to use to fill in the gaps.
However, in the natural sciences imagination is sometimes used to make links, give reasons for or draw conclusions from results of an experiment which necessarily did not produce the desired result. in Mendel's experiment with the pea plants for example in Genetics, his results probably did not make much sense to him at the time, but he imagined other possible premises from which he drew conclusions that tied in with the results he got. Thus imagination in the Natural Sciences can also be used differently from imagination in History.
Therefore I think it is of great importance to define imagination and reason with respect to the different areas of knowledge you are looking at, as their definitions vary in different areas of knowledge. Then you could compare how their roles in the different areas are similar as well.
Mr. Kidane's idea of introducing maths is really insightful. But then we all know what's coming. Our bias will kick in because we only know maths for the calculations, blah blah and we will most likely rule out the idea of imagination, not so? And, yeah, as Mr. Kitching said about the definitions we need to explore issues only relevant to the topic. Now these relevant issues can be plotted out (concept map *wink*) very appropriately using our understanding of ideas from class and the concepts in ToK. Remeber that "knower's perspective" plays a crucial role in marking. definitions are someone else's idea(which you will thereof have to cite..ehemm) and they will most definitely limit your thinking from the first to the last word of the essay. However this is only some haggard skeleton of how to approach the essay.
Now to add some meaning... Pick your two areas of knowledge. Any two that you feel you will be more able to discuss. Consider how reason plays a role in each...(and then discuss the strenghts and weaknesses) and also how imagination plays a role in the two AoK(...again discussing strengths and weaknesses).Examples would also be a very wonderful way to prove your point.
Give some real life situations/applications from your perspective(factual,though). Then finally do the major comparison and conclude.tadaa!
l would choose two areas of knowledge which are totally different like art and natural sciences and see how reason and imagination.
My Essay would contain 6 paragraphs in total.
-INTRODUCTION (exploring the meaning of reasoning and imagination)
-PARAGRAPH 1 (Reasoning and imagination in Science)
-PARAGRAPH 2 (Reasoning and imagination in History)
-PARAGRAPH 3 (Reasoning and imagination in Mathematics)
-PARAGRAPH 4 (Reasoning and imagination in Art)
-CONCLUSION
IN INTRODUCTION, first of all, I would talk about “What reasoning and imaginations are”. How people in general understands it and how it affects our knowledge and how they affect how we think. I think it is important that the meaning of “reason” and “imagination” are thoroughly “explored” that is, looked at various angle, maintaining neutral position about the importance of them.
Also, in introduction four areas of knowledge will be mentioned to be talked about in the body of the essay.
The areas of knowledge that are going to be talked about will be History, Mathematics, Science (human science and natural science) and arts because they are the most distinct areas of knowledge with their own distinct and conspicuous characteristics. But, human science and natural science needs to be dealt with as “science” because though they have different nature of variables to control, same scientific method is used.
PARAGRAPHS (BODY)
In each paragraph, one area of knowledge will be talked about and
1)how reasoning is needed/ why reasoning is needed + example
1.1)Try to relate the idea to the nature of the subject.
2)how imagination is needed/ why imagination is needed + example
2.1) Try to relate the idea to the nature of the subject.
3) Suggest how the area of knowledge could have been without
(i) reasoning (ii) imagination
4) And say, therefore, to what extent which one plays larger part in the particular areas of knowledge.
CONCLUSION
Conclude that both imagination and reasoning plays some role in every areas of knowledge but to what extent they are important to particular area differs.
Oh man!!!
I just typed out my response, pressed send and then I got lost in translation. All my hard work…
Anyway, what I wanted to say was that
In my attempt to answer this question, I would introduce a hypothetical situation in both areas of knowledge that I have chosen. From here I can discuss the possible relations to both reason and imagination in both areas of knowledge. To help, it would be good to create a concept map. It is easier to connect ideas and concepts with this map. Also, apart from the hypos, it is relevant to add real examples to make the argument more solid. But i=on the whole, I agree with chocol8 ch!p
first i would talk about reason and imagination it might be thier deffination moreover both as a way of knowing. besides i wolud talk how this two way of knowing are different and compare them as well.additionally i wolud choose subjects that mainly use imagination and reasoning the subjects might be phycis,chemistryand economics so i wolud give relevant example and explain the examples. may be from physics the concept of twins paradox which is about imagination moreover in chemistry about the structure of compounds even about the concept of demand and supply laws in economics. additionally i wolud talk about how reasoning can play role in physics as well on other may be i can talk about newton law or about peroidicity in chemistry. finally i would talk about which way of knowing play a great role compared to each areas of knowing by thier possible pros and cons. then i will summarize
Melaku,
Lots of examples here but I think you could be clearer about how to use them.
The twins paradox
Newton's laws
Demand and supply in economics
Structure of compounds in chemistry
Periodicity in chemistry
It would be really good if you could explain in more detail how these examples could be used in this essay. Can you help us with this?
I think the best way would be to fist evaluate the two separately and how effectively they can be used in the areas of knowledge and whether they are revevant to that area of knowledge. Then we can conclude on the roles which they play and in which areas of knowledge they are relevant. I guess we could look at reason and imagination in relation to all the areas of knowledge.
juss as in the sample essay we read in class i will start by distinguishing between the two terms then give some areas of knowledge i would be focusing my arguments on. then give examples in those areas of knowledge and show (if possible) whether reason or imagination was applied.
JK suggested that we look at all the areas of knowledge.
The problem here is that there is a danger that, by looking at 6 areas, the treatment of each can easily become superficial. It can also start to resemble a list - now we've finished with history we will look at science, and now we move on to meathematics...
It's very important to make connections and links between the areas, and, because there are potentially so many different kinds of links between 6 items, again there is not enough space to do them justice.
The question asks for "At least two areas of knowledge". I would recommend looking at either 2 in great depth, or probably 3 would give a better balance (I think 4 is possible, but would need very careful planning). This allows you to fulfil the breadth of knowledge required in Criterion A with the analytical depth required in Criterion C.
yh i agree, think that with this question one might be able to do better work if one focuses on gaining depth in only two, or maybe 3 areas of knowledge. I feel that chocolate ch!p's structure would generally work out but the phrasing and arrangemnt of sentences and choice of examples would play important roles in writing a decent essay..
I think it is important first to set about investigating which two areas of knowledge would fit perfectly under either reason or imagination, after which reasons should be given to support the points.
The ways of knowing are also a very essential part of this analysis as they help us to know how successful the conclusions we come up with actually are.
Post a Comment