TOK Essay 8/10 SAMPLE. (You are welcomed to use ALL the ideas) (I did this quite a while ago, so I think 7/10 should be a reasonable mark instead of 8)

TOK Essay 1-There are only two ways on which humankind can produce knowledge: Through passive observation or through active experiment.” To what extent do you agree with this statement?

Knowledge is something that helps us to make sense of the world around us. In other words, knowledge enables us to interpret and understand the phenomena we encounter, which explains why it acts as one of the fundamental requirements of civilization. In fact, most of the prominent leaps in civilization in the past were accompanied by prominent leaps in knowledge. For example, the invention of the steam engine kick-started The First Industrial Revolution while the discovery of electrical power led to The Second Industrial Revolution. Therefore in order to sustain the current rate of development, we have to generate knowledge based on the unknown phenomena we observed.

There are multiple ways to generate the knowledge, but the statement above classifies the construction of knowledge under two categories, which are passive observation and active experiment. Passive observation means that the observer doesn't interact with or deliberately influence the event when it is taking place, which permits the event to develop naturally. However, the nature of observation allows the observers to interpret the event based on their senses or tastes, As a way of knowing, sensory perception is not always reliable, which means that “passive observation” is still a subjective way to generate knowledge. On the other hand, active experiment is based on the scientific method, where experiments, data and variable controls play a big part during the investigation. The experiments are designed to target on specific areas of the research, and the observers might even interact with the reactions to optimize the outcomes of the investigation. Therefore, unlike the passive observation approach, this method allows the observer to manipulate the events, which enables the researchers to look at one specific field in depth. Moreover, the active experiment approach relies more on logical evidence such as data and graphs, which means that it is a more objective way to generate knowledge. However, before the society accepted the more neutral approach (which requires the existence of firm evidences) to generate the knowledge, our ancestors relied more on other WOKs (ways of knowing) such as imagination and sense perception to explain the phenomena and hence generate the knowledge. Therefore the given statement is the condensed view of knowledge generation in modern day society, but there are more ways to generate knowledge other than the two mentioned approaches.

Imagination plays a big role in Indigenous Knowledge System to explain the phenomena that cannot be explained using the existing knowledge, but the one may ask: How does imagination produce knowledge in this specific field of Areas of Knowledge? To what extent is imagination irreplaceable as a tool to generate knowledge for our ancestors? Nowadays Imagination is relatively undervalued in producing knowledge because of its irrationality; on the other hand, our ancestors exploited its irrationality to interpret the events creatively in different ways. For example, Australian Aboriginal groups created their own astronomical calendars through interpreting the sky. Advanced observation technology was not available at that time for the indigenous groups, and hence imagination became their most reliable tool to draw the meanings out of the randomly distributed stars. One popular idea among the Guringai people was the “Emu in the sky”, in which they connected a group of the stars as the representation of an Emu, a common bird that shared the territory with the Guringai people. Historians have discovered that Emu had some mythical implications in Guringai culture, it also appeared in many Guringai legends such as the story of Daramulan. Therefore in the context of Guringai culture, Emu escalated from an animal to a worshiping symbol that represented the mighty force of nature. Hence when they observed some natural phenomena that they couldn't explain, including the special arrangement of the stars in this case, they would use their imagination to establish a link between the events and the mythical objects. Imagination allowed the indigenous groups to overcome the shortage in knowledge and meant they could interpret the nature based on the shared knowledge within the group. In fact, increasingly, indigenous knowledge is being recognized as understanding the processes and relationships of the nature. Recently it has been given the term “traditional ecological knowledge” with the acknowledgement of the observation and reasoning. Usually reasoning is viewed separately from imagination due to its rational nature as a way of knowing. In this case, however, imagination provides key evidences for the reasoning process due to the limitation in logical approach; without imagination, the reasoning procedure cannot be carried out. To a certain extent, I think that imagination is the primary and original way of producing knowledge.

On the other hand, the major limitation of imagination as the way of generating knowledge is that it can sometimes become too personalized, and it is influenced by the dominant worldview the one subscribes to. Similarly to the Guringai people, the Wardaman people also gave the same junction of stars a graphic representation. However, since there was no implication of Emu in Wardaman culture, they perceived the same region of the sky as the head of the lawman. The Guringai people and the Wardaman people, in this example, possess different bodies of knowledge, specific to their surrounding environments. Therefore their interpretations of the sky are predominantly influenced by their different beliefs and experiences, which reveals imagination’s subjective and biased nature as a way of producing knowledge. Moreover, imagination does not require firm evidences or logical explanations, which means knowledge generated in this way cannot be tested, and therefore does not explicitly explain the reasons behind the phenomena, most of the time.

Passive observation is an improved version of imaginative observation because it limits the influence of irrational thinking. However, in modern days, passive observation is only the beginning of an investigation process. Active observation is required to test or improve the conclusions drawn fro the passive observation stage. Active observation requires the researchers to influence, or even manipulate the ongoing event to create different scenarios that they are targeted to investigate. However, unlike active experiment, it allows irrational behaviors from the tested samples. This is evidenced in the Area of Knowledge of Human Sciences. Most research in psychological is based on this method and the investigation of Stockholm Syndrome is an example that illustrates its application in real life. Stockholm syndrome is named after the Norrmalmstorg robbery of Kreditbanken in Stockholm. During the robbery, the victims who were held as hostages became emotionally attached to their captors and even gave them assistance later on. This abnormal behavior was broadcasted live on TV and quickly engaged the attentions of the researchers. However, the actual footage and information from the crime scene was limited, which caused some differences in the researcher’s hypotheses. To test these hypotheses, the researching team decided to run a simulation which was based on the actual event. However, they had full control of the situation this time, which allowed them to take an insightful look at every individual’s behavior throughout the different stages of the incident. Some of the stages are repeated more than one time to give the researchers a more detailed look of the participants. If only the passive observation approach was applied, the researches wouldn't be able to see the situation in depth, and the occurrence of random errors would affect the conclusion of the study. Active observation gives researchers more freedom to interact, or even change the neutral situation, which helps them to investigate on the areas they intend to look at. The major drawback of the active observation is approach is that it is hard to maintain the neutrality of the event once the foreign intervention is introduced. If the isolation of the event is interrupted, the conclusion obtained from the observations can’t be applied to the actual situation. Therefore the degree of intervention in active observations is a problematic issue that prevents us from obtaining the real reasons behind a phenomenon, which directly influences the degree of accuracy of the knowledge generated from them.

Generating knowledge is a broad process that involves different fields of study. Passive observation and active experiment are the two most recognized ones due to their prominent advantages. However, other methods such as imaginative observation can also be applied to produce knowledge, and they can be more effective than the mentioned two approaches in specific areas. Hence to choose what method to apply to optimize the process really depends on the nature of knowledge we intend to generate.

New Textual Analysis... Coffee by Richard Brautigan Analysis 16/20

Link to the poem: https://allpoetry.com/poem/8508973-Coffee-by-Richard-Brautigan

Coffee By Richard Brautigan-Textual analysis

The poem Coffee by Richard Brautigan is his reflection towards love and relationship. In the poem, the author utilises literal devices such as symbolism, double entendre and diction to create layered senses, provoking emotional responses from the target audience. As one of the themes is to reveal the cruel truth of love, Brautigan employs a story-telling tone to lead the target audience to explore different circumstances when the love is gone, making them feel more relatable to the content. Therefore, the target audience of the text might be the one who has felt the same way before. Moreover, this unique style is blended in the structure of the poem, which enhances the messages delivered by the author and allures the interest from the target audience. 

One feature of the poem that read stands out is its uses of symbolism. The central image “coffee” is used repetitively in the poem, which develops the flow of the storyline at different stages. The meaning of the “coffee”, however, may possess some ambiguity through the text. Therefore, the target audience may have different understandings towards “coffee” at different stages of the text. At the start of the poem, the author uses a rare diction “intimacy” to express what a cup of coffee offers, striking the target audience with this unusual expression. The adjective “intimacy” is normally used in the context of the relationship, and therefore, the author may imply that “coffee” symbolises feelings relating to love. Moreover, this use of diction provokes speculations from the target audience, which helps to gain their attention instantaneously. When the plot develops to the next stage, “a cup of coffee” becomes a bond to maintain the interactions between the protagonist and his love interest, which is a rather bizarre setting. To make the situation even more absurd, the author plays with the meaning of “a cup of coffee”. In slang, this phrase is an indirect expression of sex. However, both of the protagonist and the girl take the literal meaning of it, which may add some humour elements to the text. Alternatively, it may suggest the bitter ending of their love affair, as neither of them has the incentive to save their relationship. Following this point, “coffee”’s bitterness may reflect the devastating effects caused by love, which explains the reason why the protagonist describes coffee as “the last thing I ever wanted.” The symbol of “instant coffee” offered by the lady suggests her strong contempt towards the protagonist, which enhances the tension between them. Compare to ground coffee, “instant coffee” is a fairly cheap treatment to give to the guests, and therefore, her decision to offer him “instant coffee” may reflect her indifferent attitude. Also, “instant” coffee takes the lady less time and effort to make, which corresponds to her line “I don’t want to talk”, showing that she has no intention to sort things out with the protagonist through conversation. Instead, she wants him to leave now. Nonetheless, the audience will regard the symbol “coffee” as a representation of failed relationship at this stage of the plot. 

The meaning of “a cup of coffee” continues to develop when the protagonist meets the second lady. However, at this time, their different perspectives towards the phrase causes some dramatic tension. The lady takes the implied meaning of “a cup of coffee”, and is disgusted by this rude request she interpreted. The phrase “What do you want?” uses a question mark to enhance its impact, which gives the audience an impression that the protagonist is not welcomed. Moreover, the adverb “slightly” highlights the level of awkwardness, as the lady is not willing to invite him into the property because she is not willing to have sex with him at the first place. On the other hand, the protagonist’s intended meaning behind ‘a cup of coffee” is to start a conversation with her, but he knows that it will never work, and his words and actions indicate his depression. The phrase “why don’t you talk to me?” uses a foregrounded structure to highlight the word “don’t”, which suggests that the protagonist desperately wants to start a conversation with the lady. Moreover, his attempt of using the first personal pronouns “you” and “me” highlights his effort in removing the barrier between them, which contrasts with her cold response. The question mark at the end of this phrase raises his emotion to the climax, making this request sounds like an act of begging, underlining the protagonist’s gloomy and despairing mental state. After being offered with another treatment of “instant coffee”, the protagonist has completely lost his hope, and it is reflected on the repetition of the phrase “I didn’t feel like to…”. The repetition intensifies the protagonist’s animosity towards the symbol “instant coffee”, and the negative tone embodied in the phrase may also suggest that he realises that his last attempt is destined to fail. This powerful delivery may help the target audience to realise the cruel aftermath of the relationship, which is one of the purposes of the text. 

Other than the vivid uses of symbolism, the unique structure of the text also facilitates the author to deliver his messages. First, the text is written in the form of fragments, which interrupts the flow of the lines. However, since the whole text is written in past tense, this feature may be a visual representation of the protagonist’s disordered brain when he tries to reminisce. Moreover, the abrupt fragments make the text extremely hard to read, and therefore the target audience may feel the same level of frustration as the protagonist, facilitating them to have a more profound understanding of the text. Unlike poems that have rigid structures, this poem is in an absolute form of free flow: the majority of content is based on conversations, and the links between point to point are significantly weaker than other poems. This structure resonates with the story-telling tone, which shortens the distance between the author and the audience and makes the text sound interesting. 

Conclusively, the text is the author’s personal reflection towards the topic of love and relationship. Though the theme is quite common, the author uses the rare symbol of “coffee” to centre the development of the plot and raise the response from the target audience. Also, he employs a poem like structure to visualise the frustration and desperation when love fails to work. Both of the unique stylistic devices facilitate the author’s attempt in revealing the cruelty of love.