Wednesday, September 24, 2014
Does Your Knowledge Measure Up?
Several parts of last night's class left me thinking about standards: those by which we judge ourselves and others; those by which we measure the world we inhabit. One discussion touched on the potential objectivity of the measure "one foot." My mind wandered to bureaus of weights and measures and the efforts they put forth to maintain constants. For Sunday night, 9/28, at 9:30, please listen to this podcast, then write a post in which you share two knowledge questions directly related to the piece, one addressing History as an AoK, the other addressing Natural Sciences. For each KQ, offer a related real world situation from your own experiences. As you compose, keep in mind our discussion of hypothetical situations and their pitfalls.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
KQ 1: To what extent can historical methods affect a knower's everyday life in the present time?
ReplyDeleteExample: Besides math, I have realized that there are many other ways which history has clearly impacted our daily lives in 2014. Looking at something which I use on a daily basis, I can see a clear connection to historical methods of the past. While I send and receive emails at all hours of the day, every day, I am also aware that there was a different, more time consuming method of sending messages used in the past which has shaped the basis for the emails which we send today. In this case, the historical method can be the messages sent verbatim and the everyday life practice affected by this original historical method would be the practice of sending emails which holds the same intention but has altered due to the change of time and evolution of technology etc.
KQ 2: To what extent can reason supported by the natural sciences cause fallacies in a knower's knolwedge of a specific subject/topic?
Example: Though I do not have a personal example to support this question, there are many other real life examples that can support it. Many theories in the science world, for example, by some of the most brilliant people in the world are created based upon the known information and nature of the world of that time. However, many times these theories are proved to have flaws because of its support being the natural world which is constantly changing. One example we learned of in biology class last year was the theory that humans evolved from monkeys. Based on genetics and DNA and the similarity made between monkeys and humans, this theory was very much a possibility, however through more evaluation and intense studying on this specific evolution, scientists found that humans did not directly evolve from monkeys but that instead they share a common ancestor. In this case, reason that was supported by biology during a certain time period caused a fallacy in many people's thoughts of the human evolution.
KQ1: How does past historical events influence a knower’s standard when he or she uses emotion as a way of knowing?
ReplyDeleteAs a Chinese, I have learnt so many historical events about what the Japanese army had done to China during World War II. Honestly, I hate Japan because of the knowledge I learned during history class and the opinions I heard from the older people who had experienced that period time in the society. The things that Japan had done to China were automatically defined as immoral by me. The way how people tell about that period of history is always full of sadness and hatred. Automatically, my emotion was deeply influenced by these mournful past and the feeling of detestent towards Japan naturally grew. When I put my emotion into the study of history, the already existed moral standards can deeply affect my emotion and the way in which I interpret the history I am learning about. When hearing about something cruel that the Japanese did, my standard of cruelty become much lower than usual because I felt so closely associated with the victims because my grand-grand parents experienced the war. Therefore, a knower’s standard is influenced by historical events due to her emotion.
KQ2: How does the nature shape knowers’ standards in the modern world?
I learned from the podcast that the length of a meter and the weight of a kilogram is all related to the mass and circumference of the earth. An example that I experienced and that showed the influence of nature on standards is the use of natural resource. The amount of natural resources that human beings consume is enormous. Since the total amount of natural resources we have on earth is so big that human beings can not realize how much they consume. Although people are aware of how much we have used so far, they do not feel much of the importance of one tree, one liter of water, or one drop of oil. The greatness of the nature make people’s standards of the importance of resources higher and higher and make people take less serious about everything they are consuming.
Historical KQ : How does historical knowledge influence the knower’s perception of present knowledge?
ReplyDeleteReal life situation: Before I became aware of contemporary Chinese History, Chang’an Boulevard was my favorite place to drive down at night. It was one of the brightest streets in Beijing that marked the axis of the city, also the most famous, because that’s where Tiananmen Square is located. The street was never empty and was always full of life. However, after I learned about the all the politics that occurred on that street, especially the Tiananmen Square massacre, and the hundreds of students that were killed on that street, I can never think, or drive down that street with the same happiness as I did when I was little. The wide streets never looked the same again to me because of my knowledge of the street’s past. Now my perception of what Changan Boulevard means to me is no longer emotional, it is now also based on reason, and because of reason that I don’t “love” Chang’an Boulevard as much as before.
Natural Science KQ 2: How does a knower’s knowledge of the natural sciences change with time?
Real life situation: Last year in biology class, we learned about cell respiration and photosynthesis in detail, so it wasn’t just “photosynthesis needs light, photosynthesis makes oxygen” anymore. It’s now about photosystems, and Calvin cycles, but that’s only a result of how we are taught, and it follows a natural learning process, where we begin with broad and general stuff and gradually move to more intricate details.
To apply this to a real life situation that is more pertinent to only the natural sciences, I want to draw from my childhood in China again, because before America, I have never seen a squirrel outside a zoo, so I obliviously thought that squirrels were a tropical animal (please don’t laugh). Furthermore, when I first came to America in the summer, I actually thought that New York has a tropical climate because there were squirrels everywhere in Park Slope. Of course, seasons changed, to my surprise, and I realize that New York has the same climate as Beijing, so squirrels are not tropical animals. That was how my knowledge of one little piece of the natural sciences changed as a child.
KQ 1 (History)-To what extent can an individual’s perspective on a historical event influence a unified perspective of knowledge shared by many individuals ?
ReplyDeleteWhen I was studying slavery in the Caribbean, my history teacher nearly drilled in our minds that slavery was unjust. She would then provide many arguments to justify her claims and then on our exam papers we would have to use these same justifications to argue that slavery was wrong. Her strong perspective against slavery influenced our perspective against it as well, even if it was by force. Many times when I would study slavery in the Caribbean with friends from other schools who would usually try to counter my argument, I would not be opened to their perspectives. This is because of the far reaching sphere of influence my history teacher had on my perspective. I sometimes also like to consider the bible as an historical pathway. Whenever I attend church and the sermon is preached, my entire church usually responds saying “Amen” (meaning I agree). Realising that the pastor is preaching from his perspective of the bible, I am then brought to the crossroads of seeing how my pastor is almost like my Caribbean history teacher. Both these teachers strongly carry across a form of their perspective on a certain event in history to their audiences which enables the same perspective to be shared due to that influence.
KQ 2 (Natural Science)-How can logics counter reason to affect the accuracy of scientific knowledge?
At my past high school, I mainly did subjects relating to the arts and one science which was Human and Social Biology. Therefor I was taught to mainly think by using reason and not much logics. In one instance in my biology class we were doing biochemistry that involved using a lot of formulas and numbers to prove certain claims. A majority of what we were doing made sense logically of course, but I would also try to reason out the logics to see how we would derive a specific equation. In the end, I always got confused. My teacher would tell me, “Gabby, put aside your mind of the arts and try to think logically.” I would find it so difficult, regardless of the fact that it was biochemistry, to utilize logics over reason. Eventually I realized that especially in science, sometimes logics is the only way of knowing. Not every single thing in science can be reasoned out, but it can be logically explained.
KQ 1: How does the history of the past relate to our knowledge of what we think we know?
ReplyDeleteMany times before, time and time again, I think I know something I don’t really know. This could have been because I heard of something through the grapevine, I misheard or learned something, or just because of my naiveness. When I was talking with a friend of mine about concussions and how damaging they are. I brought up the point that people were not supposed to sleep when he or she were diagnosed with a concussion because they could potentially go into a coma. However, I was wrong because my friend recently found out that it is actually better for people to sleep when they have concussions because it relaxes their minds and their brains. I did not know this new information, but because of what I have learned in the past I thought that I did know what to do when it came to a concussion. I thought I knew what I knew, but I really did not.
KQ 2: Natural sciences is the reason we have the knowledge of measurements today.
I am not sure why I agree with this statement, but I do. I think this statement is true because measurements did start from the natural world. Just from listening to this podcast I learned that the first standard measure started with taking the measurements of the world as a whole. My father always used to tell me that there is math in everything and I always used to challenge him by telling him what math was no in, but he would explain how math was in whatever I was challenging him on. I know for him to know this he had to be familiar with how the natural world created math from the start. Even from Vi Harts videos, she explains how measurements have always been on the earth and that people did not necessarily create theme, the natural world did.
Knowledge Question 1 (History):
ReplyDeleteTo what extent should knowledge obtained from history be regarded as reliable and truthful?
While listening to the podcast, One of the things that struck me was the origin of of weight measurement. What basically was shocking to me was that everything we weigh today is basically based on the weight of a piece of metal. I then wondered How is it that we have developed a standard of measurement based on the weight of a piece of metal. What standard of measurement did they measure the metal on? Over the years scientists and mathematics have just simply accepted the kilogram as the unit of measurement and we have just adapted this. This prompted the creation of my KQ. Are there other things that we simply regard as truth without questioning. For example time. How did the inventor of the first clock know what time it was. Or the inventor of the calendar known what month they were in. When we examine history as a way of knowing there are several factors key into the truth that is accepted. Culture, Nationalism and language, opinion of the historian can affect one’s acceptance of the truth of what happened in the past. That is why history is constantly changed and rewritten. Though we have to be careful when considering History as an area of knowledge we mustn't be quick to assume that nothing should be regarded as truth because history is a study of the past and should help us live in the present. So while, the the first persons who created the measurement of weight might not have an accurate basis for their measurement, having the kilogram to use today as base measurement is very helpful to us. We cannot be too cynical when examining the past because history has taught us many lessons and provided the simple convenience of weighing things on a system that is universally accepted. One real life situation that relates to this was a recent history class when a student regarded a source as biased. The teacher then explained that biases do not exist only in history but in Math, Science and all other areas of knowledge.
Knowledge Question 2 (Natural Sciences):
How does natural science, as an area of knowledge, validate knowledge obtained from History?
In today’s culture we have a doing need for wanting to validate everything we know with science, either the physical sciences or the natural sciences. If an archaeologist finds a fossil and predicts the specie it belongs to, we have to wait on science to confirm it before we accept it as truth. Likewise,scientists today and mathematicians are rigorously trying to go back in time and try to validate the measurements of the first kilogram. They are running test and experiments to find out what number is represents a kilogram. This was what led me to question which other areas of knowledge are validated or verified by sciences. This even had me reflecting on the first knowledge question. Similar to how History at times can be an unreliable method for obtaining knowledge so are the natural sciences. We acquire knowledge from sciences through experiments. These same experiments are measured with the same standard of measurement that are questionable, not to mention the numerous possible errors that can lead one to a wrong conclusion. To answer the KQ, I have come to the conclusion that areas of knowledge interchangeably validate each other, since we use knowledge from all the areas to apply to other areas of knowledge. While writing this post I am currently think of an experiment we are doing in Biology. We are currently using math, english and visual arts to prove that our conclusion on photosynthetic rate on elodea plants are accurate. Thus, I am proving that areas of knowledge are constantly being used to validate each other.
History: To what extent can a knower’s verision of a historical truth differ from an accepted norm before it is considered invalid?
ReplyDeleteAs we saw in the podcast, the original Kilogram in France is a different measurement than all other sister kilograms. Even if the difference is the weight of one grain of sugar, the problem of varying standards arises. The International community has come to the conclusion that all kilometers around the world must be the same to eight decimal points. What about the ninth decimal? For France it could be 9, but for New Zealand it could be 1. This doesn’t matter, for it has been decided that this difference is accepted. However, there are other times in history where a theory is not accepted. As we were discussing in class at some obscene hour, there are some people in the world who believe that the Holocaust is a hoax, despite the physical evidence like landmarks and first hand accounts in the form of letters and photographs. The thoughts about how the Holocaust is a hoax has been disregarded, and is generally thought of invalid, and is not accepted around the world. Both of these examples are extreme. However, it raises different perspectives in the history classroom, and challenges how much personal perspective a person may put into a historical account before it is considered not true.
Natural Sciences: As nature changes, is it the knower’s job to change their knowledge to fit nature’s definition?
New research is being done in the field of natural science every day. Scientific theories are constantly evolving to fit nature, but what if nature changes? The original kilogram changed weight, and as we heard in the podcast the international community did not change their weight measure to match with the original, but instead tried to find common ground and redefine. Instead of changing to the definition of the original, they evolved. Therefor, in the natural sciences (a field that consumes the human race for it involves where we live, what we breathe, and how we stay alive), is it necessary for a knower to change their knowledge to match the template of nature instead of evolving? I believe that yes, this is necessary. A very simple example would be the polar ice caps. These ice caps are constantly melting, and a knower’s knowledge of their existence and how much of them are left is changing, instead of just saying that although they are melting, the amount of them remains the same. Because nature is all around us, we must conform to her natural laws, for it is one thing that we do not have utter control over.
What immediately came to mind as I listened to this broadcast was the importance of understanding the psychology of different cultures in order to better understand how to compromise and solve our differences with them. (I’m sure there is some rational explanation as to why this immediately came to mind: I’m not just pulling this out of nowhere, I promise.) I kind of free associated the idea of an internationally agreed-upon standard of weight with the idea that there are very few other internationally agreed upon concepts. Race, land, the Arab-Israeli conflict, and even innapropriate hand signals are different and sometimes even contradictory for different cultures.
ReplyDeleteFor example, in Bolivia a very bad hand signal is the okay sign that we make by forming a circle with our pointer finger and thumb, with the other three fingers pointing straight up. When I first arrived in Bolivia, unknowing of the language and feeling very foreign, I asked a cab driver for directions in my very mangled Spanish and thanked him by giving him that signal as he drove away. I got a honk from another car and a dirty look from the cab driver, but I did not understand those reactions until much later. About three weeks into my Bolivia trip, after the incident, a kind college student explained to me that the okay signal was equivalent to giving someone the finger.
A question that arose as I pondered this anecdote was this: Is there a moral obligation that humans have to attempt to understand each other, to include each others history and culture?
Another story that I was thinking about happened a couple days ago in the training room. I was talking to one of the ninth graders while Ally treated me, and she was agonizing over her height. The problem was that initially I did not understand what she was talking about, because she wasn’t using units of measurement and her numbers were like “My mom is 173, my dad is 187,”etc. She was describing her parents and their respective heights, and her grandparents and their respective heights, and she continued with her extended family and others. Meanwhile I was sitting, extremely puzzled, trying to figure out what she was talking about. In the end, I concluded that they were talking in centimeters rather than feet or inches, as I had assumed.
Although in this instance, the natural sciences did not internationally stabilize their “language”, do they have an obligation to?
KQ 1: To what extent does perception change historical fact for a knower?
ReplyDeleteFor me, perception completely changes the actual historical fact that the knower believes. When learning about the Arab- Israeli conflict in history class we learned that the way Arabs are taught about the conflict is completely different than the way the Israelis are taught. Each side is taught that the land belongs to them and that the opposing side is their enemy. Students are brought up on the belief that they have a right to hate the opposing side because, to them, the opposing side is completely incorrect and does not deserve the land they are fighting for. To the Arabs, it is historical fact that their god has given them rights to the land in the Middle East. To the Israelis, it is historical fact that their god has given them rights to the same land. Their perceptions of the history of the conflict is different, therefore their facts are different. But to them, they are still facts.
KQ 2: To what extent has natural science affected a knower's personal knowledge?
To me, natural science is the reason that we know as much as we do today. Knowledge of how things work in nature has helped us to develop our own technology. For example, man was able to develop the meter starting with the circumference of the earth. The French took the circumference of the earth divided it by an incredibly large number and was able to create a system of measuring that had not yet been created. Not only was this system good for the French, but it is now used all over the world many years later. By taking what was given to the people by nature, something that was already there, they were able to create something that is timeless and helpful worldwide. People were able to communicate trade effectively due to this discovery and are still able to do so today.
Knowledge Question regarding History: To what extent does knowledge of the past hinder a knower’s ability to objectively look at the present?
ReplyDeletePersonal experience: On my father’s side, both of my grandparents survived the Russian Purges (a.k.a The Great Purges 1928-1930). As I have grown older and more aware of the historical context of this traumatizing period in Russian history, my grandparents have become more open to talking with me about their experiences as well as their opinion. In addition, I have read multiple books and articles, as well as talking to few other Russians from the same generation. While all of this information allows for a better understanding of the time period, I am inevitably caught in a bias. Recently, Russia, especially its politics, has been under a microscope. I often get questions such as: Who does your president think he is? Is Putin a Dictator? Wow…Russia is pretty messed up, don’t you think? While I try to stay open-minded and see the world the way the IB wants me to… like a ‘global citizen’, it is hard because of the knowledge of the past that I have had throughout my childhood as well as recently. Knowing about the horrors that millions of Russians faced puts a limit on how objectively I can look at the present. Personally, when I see the news from Russia, I can justify it, whereas many others cannot. For many others it is easy to citizen (and rightfully so). While everyone has his or her own opinion, listening to this podcast I realized that much of our own individual ‘present days’ depend on our own individual ‘history’. Knowledge of the past can, to a large extent, limit ones ability to objectively view the present.
Knowledge Question about Natural Science: How important is the understanding of natural science important for a knower to have in their perspective of the world?
Personal Experience: Over the summer as I was writing my extended essay on the question: To what extent can the transition from small-scale, diverse farming to large-scale industrialized monocultures be considered the leading cause of Colony Collapse Disorder cases in Honey Bees (Apis Mellifera)? I came to a greater understanding of how important natural sciences were to my (the knowers) perspective of the world. At SBS the core science classes we are required to take demand that we have an open-minded and scientific put look on the world—at least this is the case for me. Whether I like it or not I see the world with a ‘natural science’ outlook. While my extended essay was the first time I put so much focus on one thing that is within the subject of natural sciences, it made me drastically more aware of my surrounding. In my opinion, it is crucially important to have an understanding of natural sciences within a knower’s perspective of the world.
To what extent does knowledge of history impact perception of the present day?
ReplyDeleteThis question came to my mind because of the historical information given in the podcast. Before listening to it, I had never thought about where, when or how the concept of weight had come about. I had never imagined a time of trading or even just talking about objects without a common system of measurement. However, now after I have gained this knowledge about the history of weight, my perception of our systems of measurement has changed drastically. I now realize how crucial measurement is to everyday life. This also reminded of history class and how we have been learning about the Arab Israeli conflict. The historical knowledge that I have gained from learning about this topic has completely changed my outlook on present day events. I can know understand news reports on what is happening in Israel and understand the history behind terrorist groups like ISIS and what they are doing in the present day.
To what extent does understanding of the natural sciences affect personal knowledge?
From what I have experienced in my life, an understanding of the natural sciences allows for one to gain personal knowledge as well as expand one’s perspective on the world and everyday life. In Biology class when I am learning about human body systems or procedures that the body carries out, I gain knowledge about myself and my body as well as knowledge about how intricate and fascinating science are in relation to me. In class we have also learned about what is happening in the environment which has allowed me to realize my impact on the world. I think that even just seeing something in the newspaper about the natural sciences, especially the environment, has caused me to think of an experience in my life that is related to or has impacted that aspect of science. This has given me personal knowledge and has affected how I see the world.
History as an AOK:
ReplyDeleteHow does knowledge of a certain event change a knower's perspective on that overall point in time?
Real world situation from my experience:
I remember scrolling down tumblr and seeing a post of a black and white picture from the 1950’s. The post was praising how cool it would be to live life back then.But then I thought about how African-Americans were treated during that time period and thought that I would not want to live during that time period, because it would be horrible for me. My knowledge of the event of Rosa Parks being arrested over sitting in a white person’s seat became significant for me and changed my perspective on the whole decade of the 1950’s.
Natural Sciences as an AOK:
To what extent is scientific fact relied on as the base of knowledge?
Real world situation from my experience:
At a very young age, I learned that the earth goes around the sun. It has been proven as a scientific fact, so it is something that most know and accept. I would consider this a base of knowledge because it is something that I depend on and is a piece of knowledge that I make other judgments on. For example, I know that my birthday happens every 365 days using the “base knowledge” that the earth revolves around the sun.
KQ 1: To what extent do our perspectives on certain historical events influence our perspectives on other knowledges that we acquire?
ReplyDeleteIn Mr.McCall’s history class, I learned how the Native Americans kept being displaced as the British Colonialists took over their lands. The Trail of tears is a good example of how the Native Americans were forced to move further west from their homelands by the British Colonialists. I personally thought that this was a terrible and immoral act by the British colonialists. A year after learning this, I learned about the Israeli-Palestine conflict. During the 1947-8 war, the majority of the Palestinians were forced to move out of their lands by the Israelis. Following how I believed that the British colonialists forceful displacement of the Native American was wrong, I immediately blamed the Israelis for taking over the Palestinian land. I sided with the Palestinians while blaming the Israelis for their bad actions without first viewing and understanding the situation on both sides. Clearly, my perspective on the Native American displacement influenced the one I had while learning about the Palestinian-Israeli case.
KQ 2: To what extent does our changing understanding of the natural sciences expand our understanding of the natural world?
As Andrew Marantz said, “things change—even things that were specifically designed to stay the same”. When I was in eighth grade, my biology teacher taught us about evolution. He told us that humans evolved from apes. I have always believed that we evolved from apes but it was not until I learned last year the possibility that humans might have evolved from fish. As we learned about evolution last year, Taylor showed us an upcoming famous show of a scientist who has been challenging people to believe that they evolved from fish through his evidence. As I thought about this, started thinking about how everything comes everything just like the domino that falls leading others to fall too (Mr. Bogel we were talking about this, you know what I am saying). If the apes evolved from fish, then where did the fish evolve from? This is an example of how natural sciences have expanded my understanding of the complex earth.
KQ 1: To what extent does historical knowledge differ with logic and reason?
ReplyDeleteFor my first knowledge question, my real life situation has to do with horses. A specific moment of knowledge for me was when I was measuring the height of my first horse. Automatically, I went to use a ruler to assess her height in feet and inches. To my surprise, horses are measured in a different way, they are measured in hands. Originally, the unit “a hand” was the distance from the index finger joint to the pinky finger joint. This measurement would vary according to the size of the measurer’s hand. Although “a hand” is now standardized to four inches, my logic and reason of measurement in my personal history was quite different than the actual unit of measurement. Historical knowledge of measuring a horse has continued to be regulated, often going against logic.
KQ 2: To what extent does nature affect our perception of measurement?
Throughout my childhood, my family has referred to distance and other measurements in accordance with nature. A specific moment of knowledge pertaining to this knowledge question is my mental standard of a mile. After eight years of my parents telling me that going up to the “green building” on the bike path was mile, I have always associated distance with that. I will constantly catch myself saying that a said distance is a mile because I will compare it to this standard from nature that I know. My perception of a mile, however, varies based on weather. When there is a heavy blanket of snow on the bike path, the mile looks much longer than how it looks in the summer with all the varied landscape. Another example of nature affecting my perception of measurement is how I view time. For many of us, the sun is how we measure time. The sun affects my perception of time based on its location and the general intensity of the light. Even without a standardized clock, I’m able to guess what time of day it is based off of the sun.