Thank god it's ToK, am I right?
To open up last class of ToK, my group presented a poster which posed a CKQ (Central Knowledge Question) and its claim and counter-claim. It was meant as a practice for our final ToK presentation, which will be in October, or... six months! Cue shock, terror and hoarding of energy drinks. Also, in other news: pre-mocks in three weeks. Time to get started on working.
Back to our poster, though. The CKQ was related to an article we read, which debated about articles in field of physics written by amateurs (the "outside physics") and how those articles may be published for the wider community. Our question was something along the lines of "Is it justifiable for subjectivity to determine research usage?", and it was based on the dilemma whether personal gain in form of profit, interpersonal relations or prestige can determine which studies are used in a certain magazine or paper, and can subjectivity be forgiven in case of irresistible personal gain. The claim was that, since humans want to secure the best possible life for themselves, they should be able to receive "bribery" of sorts to publish certain scientific papers; this thesis was supported by ethical egoism.
The counter-claim was backed by utilitarianism: the needs of many and the well-being of many is more important than one's personal gain. The counter-claim essentially included moral absolutism, since it states that some actions are either right or wrong, regardless of standpoint or their ultimate cause.
Also, our Maltese friends are back in the focus, as we have made another video to convince them that we are nothing to be shy from or scared about, and that we should have a Skype conference. That would be incredible, since it would precisely be one new activity which would increase our cooperation.
So far, so good. Don't expect anything new until my exams are finished, though.
See you after I complete my pre-mocks. And with a towel, I hope 😉
To open up last class of ToK, my group presented a poster which posed a CKQ (Central Knowledge Question) and its claim and counter-claim. It was meant as a practice for our final ToK presentation, which will be in October, or... six months! Cue shock, terror and hoarding of energy drinks. Also, in other news: pre-mocks in three weeks. Time to get started on working.
Back to our poster, though. The CKQ was related to an article we read, which debated about articles in field of physics written by amateurs (the "outside physics") and how those articles may be published for the wider community. Our question was something along the lines of "Is it justifiable for subjectivity to determine research usage?", and it was based on the dilemma whether personal gain in form of profit, interpersonal relations or prestige can determine which studies are used in a certain magazine or paper, and can subjectivity be forgiven in case of irresistible personal gain. The claim was that, since humans want to secure the best possible life for themselves, they should be able to receive "bribery" of sorts to publish certain scientific papers; this thesis was supported by ethical egoism.
The counter-claim was backed by utilitarianism: the needs of many and the well-being of many is more important than one's personal gain. The counter-claim essentially included moral absolutism, since it states that some actions are either right or wrong, regardless of standpoint or their ultimate cause.
Also, our Maltese friends are back in the focus, as we have made another video to convince them that we are nothing to be shy from or scared about, and that we should have a Skype conference. That would be incredible, since it would precisely be one new activity which would increase our cooperation.
So far, so good. Don't expect anything new until my exams are finished, though.
See you after I complete my pre-mocks. And with a towel, I hope 😉
