TOK

What is something that you know for a fact? Now think of four ways you can prove it. Most people will answer with, what they believe is universal and accepted, such as 1 + 1 =2. You will also notice, that if they truly believe in it, they can provide ample justifications to support their knowledge claim and even some reason behind the justification. Yet, what if the knowledge we claim to know is false. Such as the idea of a sun centered solar system. Once there was proof of a sun centered solar system the geocentric solar system was outdated and anyone who sold books were that claimed a geocentric solar system were worthless. In addition when I was young I had a night-light, I believed that it would protect me from monsters while I slept. While I had almost no justifications, other than faith and the fact that I woke up every morning, but I felt like I knew it protected me.

From this it is possible to conclude that, the knowledge we value the most using deductive reasoning, such as science and math, has the strongest justifications. Conversely, when talking about inductive reasoning, such as anything of personal or non-academic value, the knowledge we value the most does not have the strongest justifications.

Think of these knowledge claims as a brick wall and the more justification and reason you have, the stronger and bigger it is. Yet, it’s impossible to answer, without defining value, and knowledge.

Something that has value, must have a use right? I believe that ability to do something is valuable. Whether it be a practical use, such as car helps someone get to point A to point B, or a psychological use, such as a my night light made me feel safe. My night-light made me feel safe because I was afraid of the dark. I may h...

... middle of paper ...

...assume most people do to. Which is one of the reasons we have so many justifications for the knowledge that we value the most. The knowledge we gain from deductive reasoning, has the strongest justifications. On the other hand, when talking about inductive reasoning, the knowledge we value the most does not have the strongest justifications, but has more value because of faith. One final thought, I am currently conscious, I am alive, I exist, and I am important. These all relate to one claim we all value most, am I real. We obviously value it, as we would not be here without it. However, since I am real is psychological and it is impossible to prove for certain anything of mental value, is there a brick missing in the wall. If there was what would the ramifications if that weak point of the wall were to be exposed. Would reality fall apart, would we cease to exist?