Group Activity

The Enemies of Reason is a two-part television documentary, written and presented by evolutionary biologist

Part 1 Astrology


Part 2 Psychic (John Edwards)

Part 3 Séances

Part 4 Dowsing (explain a double blind test)

Part 5 Superstitions

Part 6 Satish Kumar (make a connection between this thinking and MMR vaccine scandal)
R

1. "Men in Black" on Knowledge

Trying to convince soon-to-be Agent J (Will Smith's character) to join his agency, Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones' character) says to him: "A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Everything they've ever 'known' has been proven to be wrong. A thousand years ago everybody knew as a fact, that the earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew that the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on it....Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.

Issues & questions to consider:

1) What does the word "know," in the various forms used in this quote from the third sentence on, mean? Is it referring to knowledge as philosophy has traditionally defined it?

2) Does the word "know," as it is used from the third sentence on, mean the same thing as Agent K's use of know in the second sentence? What do you make of this apparent irony?

3) What does Agent K's statement imply about the nature of human knowledge? Is it progressive? Is it provisional? How would you describe the nature of the knowledge claims Agent K refers to from 1000 years ago, 500 years ago, and 15 minutes ago?

4) What does Agent K's statement imply about the value and/or validity of "consensus gentium" (or "common sense") as a basis, or "good reason," for claiming to know something?

2. Why Dogs Smile and Chimpanzees Cry

3. Brain Sex part 3 (Post 3)

4. Happy Valentine' Day, TOK-style

The Science Behind Falling in Love
Five Senses Important in Determining Your Perfect Love Match By ANDREA CANNING
So many factors go into falling in love, but new studies prove that it may be less about romance and more about science and that it all boils down to your five senses.

For Terry Ornelas falling in love was a scene straight out of a movie. When she spotted Daniel Woodroffe across a crowded restaurant in Austin, Texas, she said "my insides just dissolved into butterflies." "When he smiled it just made me so happy and it was such a strange emotion to have with somebody you've never spoken to before have met before I couldn't explain it," Ornelas said.

Falling in love is driven by the desire to reproduce, and researchers say when it comes to finding the right mate, science is providing new clues as to how the brain and the five senses collide to create the perfect storm of love. "You slowly winnow out those individuals who don't look the part, feel the part, touch the part and you are left with the kind of person who you think is right for you. And at that point, boom!" said Rutgers University anthropology professor Helen Fisher. Researchers say there is some truth to "love at first sight." "A high forehead, big eyes, a small nose, certainly clear skin. All of these things suggest youth because that's the way a baby looks," said Jeffrey Kluger, the science editor at Time magazine. There is also "love at first taste and smell." The first kiss can literally serve as a taste test for true love.

"There can be testosterone in men's saliva. The man is sort of slipping a chemical mickey that acts as an aphrodisiac on the woman," Kluger said. That kiss could potentially determine whether a couple's genes are compatible enough to produce a healthy offspring. When you kiss, a cluster of genes called MHC are exchanged in the mouth through saliva. If your genes are too similar there could be problems carrying a baby to term.


The Nose Knows When It Comes to Love. Perhaps the most primal indicator of attraction comes from your nose. Your partner has to smell right to you. Pheromones, the chemicals that attract the opposite sex, are important, and even the timing of a woman's cycle plays a role. In a study of exotic dancers, women who were ovulating made an average of $70 in tips an hour. Those who were in the nonfertile part of their cycle only made $35.

A deep, confident voice is also attractive to women because it is filled with testosterone. One study showed the richer a man's voice, the more children he had.

"Touch is the mother of the senses, a huge amount of the brain becomes activated when you are touched or feel somebody else's touch," Fisher said.

What happens when love goes wrong? Scientists say the birth control pill may cause a woman to pick the wrong mate, because altered hormones mess with nature. When she's on the pill, she likes him. When she's off, he may no longer be Mr. Right. Enduring an emotional crisis together such as a death or a plane crash can make people think they're in love even if they're not. Alcohol or drugs can also confuse things. Having sex too early in the relationship can also be seen as unattractive, and therefore, prevent a good thing from happening in the first place.

But for Ornelas and Woodroffe, who are getting married in March, they chalk up their love connection more to luck than science. "I used to play the lottery all the time but I feel I don't have to anymore because I know it sounds girly, but I feel I have won in the universal pool of love," Ornelas said.

Copyright © 2008 ABC News Internet Ventures

5. ToK Prescribed Titles (2009) Question 10

There can be no knowledge without emotion…until we have felt the force of the knowledge, it is not ours” (adapted from Arnold Bennett). Discuss this vision of the relationship between knowledge and emotion.

The essence of the Q: while the main focus is on the key words 'emotion' and knowledge', don't be deceived into thinking that you have to ignore the other WoKs: you must explore how reason, language and perception either enhance or hinder emotion in getting knowledge. Look closely at Bennett's statement: do you think it involves any bias? What does he mean by the 'force' of knowledge? Surely the first part of the statement is blatantly wrong - I know that the internal angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees, but there's no emotion involved in that knowledge... And what does he mean by suggesting that knowledge is 'ours' - can knowledge be owned or possessed? Is it a commodity to be bought and sold? Don't fall into the trap of defining 'emotion' or equating it with 'instinct' or 'intuition', although you could certainly trace their similarities. Following Roger, you might explore the 'survival' value of emotion: how our emotions have allowed us to adapt to our environment and evolve into such strangely complex and intelligent creatures.

Knowledge Issues: Is emotion a reliable test for our knowledge? Can emotion be measured? To what extent does all our knowledge have emotive or subjective origins? Is any knowledge without emotional 'force' knowledge at all? Is objective knowledge impossible to acquire? If all knowledge springs from emotion, isn't the idea of truth completely relative? Is subjectivism a justifiable position?

Approaches: The Arts are the most relevant place to start exploring these knowledge issues - especially with regards to the issue of what makes a 'good' work of art? One person's interpretation will differ from another's and there may be some very emotive discussions of modern 'installation' art. In Ethics, Bennett's statement appears to hold true: can you think of any ethical situation that is not emotive? Distinguish here between ethics and morals - which one involves being dispassionate and objective and which one is subjective and wholly emotive? Also consider that in public speaking or debating, it's usually the people who express their knowledge with passion and emotion who get the votes: there may be little content in, or substance behind, their words, but the emotive impact of their words is everything (some have accused Mr. Obama of this). Our knowledge of history is meant to be factual and informative - we have to keep our emotions out of the events of the past, in favour of dating and categorising these events. But is this always possible? Surely, our emotions direct us in the first place in deciding which events should count as history... Now mathematical knowledge, as suggested above, doesn't involve any emotion (except, of course, if you happen to struggle with quadratic equations!). But what about the link to intuition here? Isn't their a thrill when you suddenly grasp the answer to a question without having to make all the requisite steps in the calculation? Think about the place of emotion in the Natural and Human Sciences: perhaps the approach to knowledge of the latter is more emotive. Again, you might like to explore the links to intuition and instinct, but always aim to analyse how emotion can be helped by the other ways of knowing.