Thank you so much for the video. I find it rather challenging to structure the essay because models in human science (my other AOK) also utilises mathematics. It follows that it's counterproductive to separate the two AOKs in the discussion. But it sounds messy to discuss the two AOKs altogether. How would you approach the essay structure?
Thanks for the comment, and the 'useful' question. You could explore the relationship between the two AoKs, particularly the use of mathematical models in AoK Human Sciences. IMO there's a lot of scope to discuss how mathematical models are produced in a largely hypothetical framework that requires interval, or ordinal, classes. However, they may be limited when applied to the Human Sciences which can be more qualitative in nature. As such, the mathematical model may shape the labelling, categorisation and interpretation of human scientific knowledge. This would then have to be applied to the question of whether this makes the model "wrong but useful" - that's the real focus of the essay.
Is this part correct as a counter claim saying that indeed it was incorrect or disproved in first glance then it was proven correct and be useful, so it can be used in both ways? These earlier models, although incomplete, laid the groundwork for the answer to the theorem. Additionally, Wiles’s proof fostered new methods and influenced mathematical research. This underlines that mathematical models and proofs can suggest reliable frameworks with a low margin of errors considering comprehending intricate relationships, even while models can have limitations.
Yes - you could certainly argue that models that seem initially 'wrong' may become more accepted as more evidence is collected. However, the more pertinent issue is whether the model can actually be 'wrong' at all. Just because collected evidence in that one scenario does not align with the model doesn't necessarily mean that the model is wrong. It depends on a range of factors such as intentions of the model producers & users, context, expectations etc etc
There's no prescribed min/max amount. However, if you start by writing 1 main claim for each AoK, and then developing smaller claims from the big ones you'll be on the right track. You can find out more here: www.toktoday.com/blog-posts/2023/12/05/mastering-tok-essay-structure-a-comprehensive-guide/
you are a lifesaver
I'm glad you found it useful. Thanks for the comment.
Thank you so much for the video. I find it rather challenging to structure the essay because models in human science (my other AOK) also utilises mathematics. It follows that it's counterproductive to separate the two AOKs in the discussion. But it sounds messy to discuss the two AOKs altogether. How would you approach the essay structure?
Thanks for the comment, and the 'useful' question. You could explore the relationship between the two AoKs, particularly the use of mathematical models in AoK Human Sciences. IMO there's a lot of scope to discuss how mathematical models are produced in a largely hypothetical framework that requires interval, or ordinal, classes. However, they may be limited when applied to the Human Sciences which can be more qualitative in nature. As such, the mathematical model may shape the labelling, categorisation and interpretation of human scientific knowledge. This would then have to be applied to the question of whether this makes the model "wrong but useful" - that's the real focus of the essay.
Is this part correct as a counter claim saying that indeed it was incorrect or disproved in first glance then it was proven correct and be useful, so it can be used in both ways?
These earlier models, although incomplete, laid the groundwork for the answer to the theorem. Additionally, Wiles’s proof fostered new methods and influenced mathematical research. This underlines that mathematical models and proofs can suggest reliable frameworks with a low margin of errors considering comprehending intricate relationships, even while models can have limitations.
Yes - you could certainly argue that models that seem initially 'wrong' may become more accepted as more evidence is collected. However, the more pertinent issue is whether the model can actually be 'wrong' at all. Just because collected evidence in that one scenario does not align with the model doesn't necessarily mean that the model is wrong. It depends on a range of factors such as intentions of the model producers & users, context, expectations etc etc
How many knowledge claims do we need in our essay
There's no prescribed min/max amount. However, if you start by writing 1 main claim for each AoK, and then developing smaller claims from the big ones you'll be on the right track. You can find out more here: www.toktoday.com/blog-posts/2023/12/05/mastering-tok-essay-structure-a-comprehensive-guide/
Can you di a video on the first prescribed title
I hope to have the video on Essay #1 uploaded by Thursday 17th Oct.