Are you certain that's the correct direction? (Make-up/Extra Credit)

As I was searching for web resources on the zodiac/astrology post, the following quote jumped out at me: "If you watch a spinning toy top, explains Kunkle, you will see its axis wobble. That's called precession. The Earth's axis does the same thing. It's currently facing Polaris, often called the North Star, but 3,000 years ago it was pointing at an obscure star called Thuban." (from "So, Now What's Your Sign?") It immediately reminded me of the story I heard a couple of days earlier about the changes necessary at the Tampa Airport due to a shift in the magnetic north pole. ("Magnetic North Pole Shift Affects Tampa Airport") According to National Geographic's website, the magnetic north pole appears to be shifting towards Russia at the rate of approximately 25 miles a year. ("North Magnetic Pole Is Shifting Rapidly Toward Russia"). Consider the knowledge claims quoted above and made in the two articles. Use them as a jump-off to reflective comments on knowledge and how we know what we claim to know.

Do You Know? Do You Believe? How Gullible are You?

Click on your choice of the links below to take one of the Museum of Hoaxes' gullibility tests:
Science & nature test
History & culture test
Once you've taken one of the tests, create a post to report your score, then reflect on what the test and your performance have to say about the nature of knowledge, truth, belief, and/or justification (i.e. "good reasons," to use Abel's term).

Mysteries of Stonehenge

CLICK HERE to visit National Geographic Magazine's recent exploration of Stonehenge and it's purpose or significance. Consider the knowledge claims made in this feature about what Stonehenge is/was and compare them against the various claims that have been made in the past (e.g. religious shrine, giant clock, monument built by aliens, etc.). What do you think you know about Stonehenge? How does that compare to the knowledge claims discussed in the National Geographic feature? It might be interesting, from a TOK perspective, to take their 10 question "Stonehenge Quiz" before reading the article. (CLICK HERE for the quiz.)

Which came first, language or perception?

The title of this post is intended to be a play on the old philosophical question, Which came first - the chicken or the egg? CLICK HERE to go to the New York Times article, "When language can hold the answer," discussing research findings on the role language may play in sense perception, including things as basic as recognizing colors. Use the article as a prompt to reflect on the relationship between these two Ways of Knowing.

Additional writings about this subject can be found at:
"Hues & Views: A cross-cultural study reveals how language shapes color perception"
"Do our languages shape the nuts and bolts of perception, the very way we see the world?" (Scroll down to the second response/entry on this page. Interestingly, this statement was made by Professor Boroditsky in response to the very TOK-ish question, "What have you changed your mind about?"
"Reframing: How language shapes perception" (this "article" is really a blog posting, and the blogger has an
interesting background/perspective that is worth thinking and reflecting about)

Just how gullible are you?

Visit the Museum of Hoaxes (www.museumofhoaxes) and take one of the "hoax photo tests" or one of the "gullibility tests." You will find the links for them in the second row of links at the top of the site's home page. Report your score and comment on: a) the significance and implications of your performance on the test, or b) test items you found interesting, confounding, or even that you disagree with the site's answer for.

'Demons in the Dark:' How science talks about UFO's

CLICK HERE to read a scientific perspective on the UFO sightings in a Texas town that were the focus of the February 2nd post on this blog.

Click here to view the video that accompanies this story on the Newsweek website.

"...And fifteen minutes ago, you KNEW that humans were alone..."

The town of Stephenville, Texas was recently in the national news because a number of townspeople publicly claimed to have seen a UFO on several different nights. After initially saying there were no military jets in that area when the sightings occurred, the military later announced that Navy F-16's were training in that area. Ironically, the people who claimed to have seen the UFO said the second announcement served as proof for their claim. The following links will take you to two news stories with accompanying video clips about the controversy.

Dozens in Texas town report seeing UFO

Officials: UFO sightings were military jets

Questions & issues to consider:

• Do you believe the townspeople's claim that they saw a UFO? Why or why not?
• If you don't believe them, what would it take for you to be convinced that they are right? What kind of evidence (justifications) would you require, and why?
• What role do you see the concepts of "epistemic certainty" and "psychological certainty" playing in this story?
• To what degree is your willingness (or unwillingness) to believe the townspeople a reflection of your prior knowledge and beliefs? To what degree is that appropriate and/or reasonable? Are your prior knowledge and beliefs a help or a hinderance to you in evaluating the knowledge claims presented in this story? Elaborate.
• Consider/evaluate the role that sense perception plays in this incident. Do you consider the sense perception of the townspeople a reliable justification? Why or why not?

Catbert on Knowledge

For a larger version, simply click on the comic strip above.

Questions & issues to consider:

A) In the third frame, Catbert says, "Stress is just another word for knowledge." What does this comment imply about knowledge (e.g. its nature, its basis, its consequences, etc.)? Do you agree or disagree? Why?

B) In the fourth frame, Catbert asks the quintessential TOK question, "How do I know that?" about his (her?) statement from the third frame. But are there any frames in the strip that the question would not apply to? What does this say about the nature of knowledge, or knowing?

C) What do you make of the mantra that Catbert recites in the next to last frame of the strip? What do you conclude is the artist's message here? Do you agree or disagree? Why?

Dark Energy on Parade

Courtesy of Melanie Gibson...

Check out the cover story on today's Parade Magazine, titled "The Secrets of Dark Energy." Some time on Tuesday, the full text becomes available on Parade's website; clicking here will take you to it. (Yes, I will leave the blog open for comments thru the school's 3 p.m. Wednesday deadline for seniors to turn in work.)

Questions & issues to consider:

•Melanie specifically points out the following quote from the author of the article, Meg Urry:

What excites me personally is how the discovery of Dark Energy illustrates that science is not a set of beliefs that one constructs. Instead, scientists observe nature, then develop theories that describe their observations. Science is driven by nature itself, and nature gives us no choice. It is what it is.

This quote raises connections to several readings and discussion topics from this year:
A) How might the author of the reading, "Ten Things We Think We Know About Science," regard or respond to this quote? Would he say it is consistent with an accurate understanding of science, or another example of where science education falls short?
B) During the mathematics unit, we briefly touched on the question of whether mathematics are discovered or created. And for those who attended the lecture on Kurt Gödel's incompleteness theorem, the speaker raised this issue again, indicating Gödel's position on the issue. Use this quote as a springboard to compare and contrast the natures of science and mathematics to one another, particularly with respect to the philosophical question of discovered or created.
C) Dr. Urry's quote and the issue raised in B above become still more interesting when considered in light of the nature of the very close relationship between science and mathematics. Take a look back at the 3 articles we read as a jigsaw activity in class about that relationship (one article had the clever title, "Math has π on its face"), then comment on Dr. Urry's quote.

•The article is filled with knowledge claims about "dark energy" -- its impact on the universe, its place in science history, and its potential economic uses and impact. And yet, ironically, the caption to an accompanying picture of the author includes this quote, "Dark Energy makes up two-thirds of the universe -- and we don't know what it is." The article itself includes this paragraph:

But first, we have to figure out what exactly Dark Energy is. So far, we know only that it causes the expansion of the universe to speed up. We call it 'dark' because we don't directly see it. 'Dark' is code for 'we have absolutely no clue what it is!'

(Emphases in each quote added.) It seems rather ironic to have so many knowledge claims about something the author says we know so little about. What is your response to this irony? How do you reconcile these seemingly conflicting comments?

•Immediately after the quote that Melanie pointed out, Dr. Urry writes: "As new facts emerge, scientific theories can be proved wrong or in need of modification, but scientists cannot ignore them. Eventually the facts will lead to the right theory."
A) To reprise some questions I raised in an earlier post: What is a "fact?" We've spent a lot of time this year wrestling with the concepts of "knowledge," "truth," and "belief," but we've never discussed the term "fact." What do we mean by that term? What makes something a "fact?" How is a fact different from knowledge, truth, and belief? Or is it different from any one of those?
B) And as I asked about another quote above: How might the author of the reading, "Ten Things We Think We Know About Science," regard or respond to this quote? Would he say it is consistent with an accurate understanding of science, or another example of where science education falls short?

•Consider the knowledge claims contained in this quote from the article's concluding paragraph: "The answers are there, and I have no doubt that we will figure them out with the contributions of the smart young people now taking high school physics...." Consider and comment on the nature (psychological, epistemic) and intensity of the certainty expressed in that statement. What bases, what justifications do you think Dr. Urry might point to in support of her expressed certainty and knowledge claims?

Rediscovering the Dinosaurs

The link below is to an article that originally aired as a news story on ABC World News Tonight: "Rediscovering the Dinosaurs". And it reminded me of a "Bizarro" comic strip that can be seen at
http://gh.gresham.k12.or.us/~currier/Bizarro%20re%20dinosaurs.jpg.

Questions & issues to consider:

In light of this report, what will be your reaction to the next dinosaur exhibit you view? Explain.

Consider the short reading you read and summarized earlier this semeser titled, "Evaluating Scientific Claims." What are some questions that you would want to pose to the scientists and museum exhibit creators about the new exhibits? Why would those questions be important to you?

What is your reaction to the argument presented for a shorter tail for tyrannosaurus rex? Do you find it convincing or credible? Why or why not?

What is your reaction to the following quote from the article? "These bones begin to dictate to you the way that they want to be put back together again," says Fraley, "the way they want to be lifted up or held."

R.I.P. Certainty?

For a larger image of this comic strip, click here or here.

Questions & issues to consider:

A) What is the cartoonist's point about certainty? What do you think, or make, of his point?

B) Comment on the quality, quantity, and content of the evidence (examples) the three characters provide in support of the boy's declaration, in the second-to-last frame of the strip that "The world's a less silly place without you!"

C) The last two frames of the comic strip present an ironic juxtaposition of ideas regarding certainty -- consider the boy's comment in the second-to-last frame ("The world's a less silly place...") in comparison with his exchange with Opus in the last frame. Comment on the ideas contrasted between the two frames. [e.g. Compare the content of Opus' comment in the last frame with the content of the statements quoted in frames 2 - 7 of the strip. Consider the implications of the boy's declaration in the next-to-last frame when applied to Opus' closing comment. Think about your intial reaction to the boy's statement in the last frame.] What observations, conclusions, and/or implications about knowledge and certainty are sparked by the strip?

D) Why did the cartoonist choose to add the last frame? Why didn't he just draw the headstone in the next-to-last frame and end there? Note: I'm certain ;-) it wasn't just to fill up space.

[Be sure to focus your comments on the knowledge issues raised in the comic strip. This comic strip clearly has a political overtone and slant. However, responding to that political element should not be the primary focus of your comments.]