What is Art?

Write a personal definition of art.
A piece of art is a man-made creation made for the purpose of communicating truths, feelings, or ideas. 

What do you know via Art as an Area of Knowledge?  Give a specific example to support your response.

I think that the Knowledge Area of Art can help you to learn more about yourself. In creating art, you can take what is inside of you (feelings, thoughts, ideas...) and bring them into the material world in order to examine them. By examining your art, you can gain a lot of knowledge about how you really feel, or what you value or maybe it will trigger an idea you weren't conscious you had. For example, I once decided to paint a barn scene. As I began to sketch out my ideas, I realized that the scene I was thinking of was the view at the beginning of one of my favorite movies. Through this, I was reminded of something I valued. After the painting was completed, I was also able to look at it and learn more about myself. I liked the colors in the painting and that way that the sun came through the trees. I could tell that I liked nature. The overall tone of the piece was calm and peaceful. Because I liked the piece, I could tell that I liked peace and calm. Other people could learn about themselves in similar ways. 

Knowledge Issues in History

1.  What is historical pluralism?
I don't know what it is and I can't find any information on it.


Historical pluralism refers to the idea that multiple (even contrasting) histories may be written (attributable to differences in historial evidence used, personal perspective (bias) of the historian etc). ~Dr. Gilligan 

2. What factors influence the process by which the historian picks and chooses his/her "facts"?  Please provide a specific example for each factor.
The reliability of the sources (ex. Nazis and Jews may say different things about concentration camps), the date of the sources (ex. whether they were written at the time of the event they describe, written before it, or after it) , the number of times the fact is mentioned in the same way (ex. the more people say the same thing the more likely the historian is to believe the fact) , whether or not the fact makes sense to the historian (ex. if they were told that Americans flew cows to India during a famine for them the Indians to eat in the 1700s, a historian would be unlikely to believe it) .

3.  According to Reuben Abel: "The patterns to be found in past events are selected by the historian; like the hypothesis of the scientist, they may be suggested, but are neither imposed nor dictated, by the facts" (Man is the Measure (MIM), p. 166-7)."  Based on your experience with the Cheques Lab, how far do you agree with this explanation of history?


I agree with the statement for the most part. I guess that facts can't really dictate patterns. The conclusions we made about the Whitneys from the checks were all our own hypothesis. We don't know why things were then way were. The checks don't tell us that the Whitneys had a son, but it is strongly implied by the data in the checks.

4.  Abel also writes: "Macaulay regards history as a branch of literature (MIM, p. 174)."  How would Jill Lepore of "Just the Facts, Ma'am" respond?  Please provide to specific quote from the article to justify your claim.

Lepore would probably understand what Abel is saying. She quotes Jane Austen (a writer of fiction) and the Author of Tom Jones (a work of fiction) and they both make statements to the effect that their fictional novels are just as true as history books. Lepore says, "Fielding insisted that what flowed from his pen was “true history”; fiction was what historians wrote."

5.   What does Reuben Abel mean when he says: "No crucial experiment can test the validity of a theory of history, any more than than it can the truth of a metaphysical theory (MIM, p. 174)."?

He means that there is no way to go back in the past and prove a historical theory just like there is no  way to prove a metaphysical theory. Metaphysical theories are philosophic explanations of what things are like and why they are there. Both metaphysical theories and historical theories need some overarching authority to ultimately prove or disprove them. 

Art

Choice A. Did you know that many tribal cultures have no word for art or artist?

Without words for art is it still possible to create and appreciate art?

An example of a tribal culture without a word for Art is Bali. In Bali, activities such as painting are closely connected to religious ritual. I think that this changes the artists purposes in creating art. Rather than trying to make something for the sake of art, they are simply participating in religious ritual. Because of their purpose, I would not call the things they create as art. However, I think it is possible for us to create statues and paintings just like theirs and call them art, because our purpose would be different. Or, if we found ancient artifacts of their creations we could call them art because they would no longer be fulfilling their purposes. 

I definitely think it is possible for these tribes to appreciate art though. If they saw something man-made for the purpose of art and admired it, they would be appreciating art. Because their creations are used for specific purposes though, they may not appreciate "non-practical" art as much as their own creations. They might see our art as useless.

In such communities does art have a different function or role within the society?

Yes, in Bali it has religious functions.

To what extent then is "art" a culturally relative term?

I guess I wouldn't call art a culturally relative term.

Stanford Prison Experiment

What police procedures are used during arrests, and how do these procedures lead people to feel confused, fearful, and dehumanized?
Police take people out of their environments and forcibly take them to unfamiliar and more uncomfortable locations. Police don't talk very much, only saying what is exactly necessary in the situation. People are pushed up against a car, so they can't see what is happening to them and they have no way to escape. Handcuffs are also placed on them. 


People could feel confused because there is not much communication between themselves and the police. 
They could feel fearful because they have no control over the situation and because they are being removed from their homes.
They could feel dehumanized because of both the lack of communication and the harsh treatment.  


After the study, how do you think the prisoners and guards felt when they saw each other in the same civilian clothes again and saw their prison reconverted to a basement laboratory hallway?


The prisoners probably felt confused, and maybe they even ashamed of themselves. Seeing everything go back to normal would remind them that the whole thing had only been an experiment, and that all of the pain, humiliation, and suffering they had been through was all just a set up. They would be reminded that they did in fact have control in the situation and could have left at anytime. I think it could also make them angry, they were miss treated for no reason. They would also probably feel relieved that it was all over.


The guards who had been cruel probably felt horrified with themselves. They had become terrible people. When the prisoners were dressed in the same clothes the guards were, the guards would be reminded that the prisoners were no different than they were. They had miss treated normal people, not animals. 


Some of the guards might feel angry because their power and authority had been taken away.

ToK Presentation Ideas

Real-life situation/contemporary problem: Crime

Knowledge issues: What was his crime? Who decides? Can people be punished for their plans? Should it be as serious as punishment for crimes?

Format: Look at news articles to see how some crimes were punished and compare them. Answer the questions: Are people punished for crimes they didn’t carry out? Is this ethical? What do law enforcers seem to think?

Knower’s (student’s) point of view: It doesn’t see as ethical to punish people for crimes they did not actually commit, but sometimes it is beneficial and necessary. For example, terrorist attacks.

Additional notes: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/28/us/28portland.html?_r=1&hp

Real-life situation/contemporary problem: Art Programs in Schools

Knowledge issues: Who decides what should be thought in schools? Can art programs really benefit kids in ways that other programs can’t?

Format: Look at and compare experiments and opinions of experts. School Board format maybe, with different characters talking about different knowledge issues

Knower’s (student’s) point of view: I’m not sure yet, I need to read some more articles.

Additional notes: http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2007/09/02/art_for_our_sake/

Hard and Soft Sciences

3. What aspects of the dispute between Lang and Huntington are "political?" How does the author feel about Academic Freedom?

One aspect comes from the fact that Huntington seems way more accredited and worthy of a position in the NAS than Lang, however, “Lang had previously assumed for himself ‘the role of a sheriff of scholarship, leading a posse of academics on a hunt for error,’ especially in the political and social sciences.” This seems much more political than scientific. Also, “Huntington had done several things that are now anathema in U.S. academia: he received CIA support for some research; he did a study for the State Department in 1967 on political stability in South Vietnam; and he's said to have been an early supporter of the Vietnam war.” Huntington’s “role in Vietnam” was frequently discussed I the NAS debates. The author is worried that, “Academic freedom means that outsiders can't raise the issue of a scholar's politics but other scholars can.”

5. Why does Diamond find fault in the traditional perceptions of the hard sciences?

He believes that science is not just, “defined by decimal places and controlled experiments,” but is also, “ the enterprise of explaining and predicting -- gaining knowledge of -- natural phenomena, by continually testing one's theories against empirical evidence.” He also says, “The world is full of phenomena that are intellectually challenging and important to understand, but that can't be measured to several decimal places in labs. They constitute much of ecology, evolution, and animal behavior; much of psychology and human behavior; and all the phenomena of human societies, including cultural anthropology, economics, history, and government.”

6. Why are soft sciences difficult to study?

They are more difficult because the things studied are a lot less controllable. “You can't start it and stop it whenever you choose. You can't control all the variables; perhaps you can't control any variable. You may even find it hard to decide what a variable is. You can still use empirical tests to gain knowledge, but the types of tests used in the hard sciences must be modified. ”

9. Briefly describe how Diamond illustrates operationalization in:

Math – Comparing amounts of things, like bananas

Chem – To measure the amount of an ingredient or the degree of something in relation to ingredients

Ecology – To measure habitat complexity

Psych – To decide why some doctors act the way they do

12. Why does Diamond believe that Lang might be ignorant of the measurements taken by social scientists like Huntington? 

Because he asks the question, ''How does Huntington measure things like social frustration? Does he have a social-frustration meter?''

14. Does Diamond believe the soft sciences to be more valuable than hard sciences? Do you agree? Explain.

He says, “As to the relative importance of soft and hard science for humanity's future, there can be no comparison. It matters little whether we progress with understanding the diophantine approximation. Our survival depends on whether we progress with understanding how people behave, why some societies become frustrated, whether their governments tend to become unstable, and how political leaders make decisions like whether to press a red button.” If he believes that our survival depends on the soft sciences, he obviously thinks that they’re important.

The End of Science

4. Why did Karl Popper find the use of observation in scientific inquiry as 'ludicrous?'  According to Popper, what should begin a scientific investigation?
He says, "Observation is always selective. It needs a chosen object, a definite task, an interest, a point of view, a problem." Popper suggests that a scientific investigation should begin instead with a hypothesis, "for without a hypothesis to guide research, scientists would have no way of distinguishing relevant from irrelevant data.

5. Why did Popper view Science as an "attempt to falsify rather than verify hypotheses?"
He thinks this becuase, "NO universal generalization can be conclusively confirmed, for we can never be sure that we have examined all the relevant data. It is always possible that we will discover something that will overturn even the most well established theory.

7. What were some criticisms of Popper?
Hypotheses can no more be conclusively falsified than they can be conclusively verified, for a hypothesis cannot be tested in isolation. If a test fails, it is always possible to maintain the hypothesis in question by rejecting one or more of the background assumptions. Popper's demarcation criterion is too weak to distinguish science from pseudoscience. If a theory is scientific as long as there is some possible state of affairs whose actual occurrence would refute the theory, then many seeming non-scientific theories would gain, :scientific status."

9. What does Kuhn mean by a 'paradigm shift?'
"Kuhn and Feyerabend see science primarily as a puzzle-solving exercise. The rules for solving particular puzzles are contained in a paradigm. A paradigm defines for scientists what sorts of puzzles are worth solving and what sorts of methods will solve them. From time to time, however, certain puzzles or "anomalies" arise that cannot be solved with the existing paradigm. When the cognitive dissonance created by these puzzles becomes too great, the scientific community undergoes a "paradigm shift." 

10. What are the implications of the statement: "There is no truth with a capital T" in Science?
It means that nothing in science is certain, things can never been depended upon because they can easily change. It suggests that maybe people should look to other AoK for Truth. 

Hindu Diety

https://docs.google.com/present/edit?id=0AZ1B9J-1sQZgZHY2cm1ueF81ZzN2YmN6Y2c&hl=en

Doubt

Post a one-paragraph reflection on the concept of 'doubt' and the story of Job.  You may relate your ideas to any area of knowledge, as well as to daily life experiences.


The story of Job is about questions; specifically the question why. Why do bad things happen? Why do bad things happen to me? Who decides what happens and why do they make this decision? I think that Job's doubt is reflected by his questions of why. At the beginning of the book, as things start to go wrong, Job simply accepts them. He trusts that God, who has given Job everything Job has, has the right to also take those things away. However, as time goes on and worse and worse things start happening to Job, he begins to ask why. Rather than accept his fate as he does at the beginning of the book, Job wants to be sure that his suffering is justified. Rather than blind trust, Job asks for justification of his situation, maybe because he doesn't believe that God has a good reason. Job wants God to communicate with Job; either through the human ways of knowing, either emotion, sense perception, language, or reason and tell him why. It seems, by God's response, that God doesn't want to be questioned. He wants his people to trust Him.

Abel: Man is the Measure - Chapter 10

List of Varieties of Explanations

Definition of Terms

Paraphrase of a document in simpler or more familiar words

Explain Rules

Analyze what is logically entailed by certain postulates of logic and mathematics

Demonstrate a skill or technique

Provide reasons, motives or beliefs

Refer to the metaphysical universal similarities

2. What are some common misconceptions about scientific explanations?  How does Abel refute each one?


Science describes rather than explains-"Actually, no sharp line can be drawn between description and explanation. If the scientific explanations of why the pond froze and why there was an eclipse are really only descriptions, what, then, would an explanation be? How else would you describe those events?"

Science explains the strange by the familiar-"typically, the reverse is the case. Such familiar phenomena as rust, sunrise, tides, illness, family resemblance, and so on, are explained by such unfamiliar concepts as oxidation, gravitational attraction, invisible germs, and genes."


"Scientific explanation is not the same as "understanding" in the sense in which it is said, for example, that... an experienced nurse understands children. Such an understanding is more like knowledge by acquaintance or like knowing how than like science. 


"A scientific explanation need not be a causal law. It may be a law of simultaneous existence rather than of succession.  Boyle's Law associates the pressure of gas with its volume, but pressure and volume are not cause and effect."


6. Why does scientific expanation require the concept of system?
A system is essentially invariant to changes in its parts or elements. So, when seeking a scientific explanation, it is good to find a truth that doesn't change depending on the variables, something that is always true. An example of systems used in science is the nerve of an animal. 


10. What does Abel mean when he says. "The growth of science is not a clear-cut, straighforward progression toward a unique, all-inclusive final truth." (p. 100)


He means that many factors influence the ": course of science." The choice of questions asked depends on the present political and social pressures etc. Some discoveries also come by accident or because of experimental error.

"Finally, there is the question of what situations are seen by scientists as requiring explanation. As I said earlier that puzzlement may vary with the person and the context. Are there situations that are intrinsically puzzling? or objectively require an explanation?"

12. What is the role of the human element in the progress of scientific explanation?
"Our perceptual knowledge is delimited by our characteristic biological capacities, and there are limits to the completeness of our theoretical structures. But our observations and out theories mutually reinforce each other. If we never trusted some sort of evidence, nothing whatever could ever be tested. The structure of our science is pragmatically justified; it is the most reliable knowledge ther is; it is in every sense objective."
G4P. Choose one Aim of the Group 4 Project and comment on how you met that aim.  Include specific references from your Group 4 Project (preparation and fieldwork).  

The following excerpt is taken from the Group 4 subject guides:

     The group 4 project is a collaborative activity where students from different group 4 subjects work together on a scientific or technological topic, allowing for concepts and perceptions from across the disciplines to be shared in line with aim 10—that is, to “encourage an understanding of the relationships between scientific disciplines and the overarching nature of the scientific method”.
     The group 4 project allows students to appreciate the environmental, social and ethical implications
of science and technology. It may also allow them to understand the limitations of scientific study, for
example, the shortage of appropriate data and/or the lack of resources. The emphasis is on interdisciplinary
cooperation and the processes involved in scientific investigation, rather than the products of such
investigation.
     The choice of scientific or technological topic is open but the project should clearly address aims 7, 8 and 10 of the group 4 subject guides.

Below is a partial list (Aims 7, 8, 10) of the common Aims of the Group 4 subjects:

     Through studying any of the group 4 subjects, students should become aware of how scientists work and communicate with each other. While the “scientific method” may take on a wide variety of forms, it is the emphasis on a practical approach through experimental work that distinguishes the group 4 subjects from other disciplines and characterizes each of the subjects within group 4. It is in this context that all the Diploma Programme experimental science courses should aim to:

7. develop and apply the students’ information and communication technology skills in the study of science 8. raise awareness of the moral, ethical, social, economic and environmental implications of using science and technology
10. encourage an understanding of the relationships between scientific disciplines and the overarching
nature of the scientific method.
__________________________________________________________________________________
I think that my group did a good job of , "developing and applying the students’ information and communication technology skills in the study of science." We really did a good job of communicating with one another. During our first meeting, our group did a good job of brainstorming possible ideas for the project. Everyone participated in this process by being part of the discussion and expressing their opinions. During the field day, our group continually took a step back from the data to talk about it and brainstorm new was to approach data collection. Technology such as video cameras and a labquest were very important in helping us record our progress and collect data. To actually create the presentation, we collaborated using facebook and google docs. This worked extremely well.Even though we were in different locations, we were able to collaborate on the same project. We were able to "bounce ideas" off each other and work together to come up with the best ways to make our presentation. By using technology to help us communicate, we were able to gain scientific knowledge. We were able to work together to analyze the data and come to good conclusions. 

Journal Entry: BP Oil Spill Debate

200-400 words
a. WHOI Scientist

b. Experts have intellectual and emotional stakes in knowledge.  Describe the principle(s) that guide members in your area of expertise.  Include at least two principles. 

While it is impossible to classify all scientists into the same group where they all have the same principles, I can describe some principles that would guide me as a scientist and might guide others as well. In the debate I was specifically an environmental scientist looking at the spill with regard to the damage done to animal and plant communities.

Usually if someone studies something in depth, they start to develop an emotional attachment to it. I think if I really were a scientist, I would feel sympathy for the animals hurt from the spill and I think other scientists feel the same way. Because of this, one of their principles would be to conduct their tests and research in such a way as not to harm the environment.

Another principle that I think is valued by scientists is that conclusions should be true to the data collected. I know from writing my labs that I need to carefully study the data before making decisive conclusions. If I don't do this, my teacher (a scientist) will take points off my lab.


c. Describe the influence that the opinion(s) of an expert in another area (outside your constituent group) had on your opinion(s).  Give at least one specific example.

Before the debate, I thought badly of BP. I thought that they weren't doing a good job of cleaning up the spill and that they were handling the crisis in the wrong ways. However, as I listened to BP group members, they said that they were doing all they could to help. I know that a lot of times this can be stated insincerely, but it made me wonder if maybe BP really is doing all they can. They do have a huge and very difficult responsibility.

Listening to the Gulf Residence representatives also affected my thinking. Stories from every day people added emotion and a sense of realness to the crisis. Rather than just numbers and facts, it became a very real event. It made the data come alive.



d. Compare the positive features and limitations of expert opinion; create a pair of lists.  Include at least two strengths and at least two weaknesses.

Positive:
Experienced
-they know how to collect data well
-they know how to interpret data well
Knowledgeable
-because they are experts they would be able to think of significant factors that other people would never understand

Negative:
They might not be able to see other points of view
If they are biased towards something, they might give a biased report on their findings
-however people would probably trust them solely on the fact that they are experts


e. Comment on the responsibility that your constituent group has for (i) the occurrence of the BP Oil Spill in April 2010, and (ii) the restoration efforts in the Gulf region.

Because scientist could probably have best predicted the possible negative effects of a spill, they should have realized the importance of preventing a spill and should have done more to enforce rules to protect the environment.

We need to provide information about what happened before, during and after the spill; data about what we have accomplished so far and about how we could improve; and we need to speculate about the negative effects of the spill in the future and how best to counter act them.

(Word Count: About 500 minus the questions)

Gulf Oil Spill

Step 1
Group C, BBC:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/10317116

Step 2
Timeline

April 20 2010: 11 people died in explosion in the Gulf of Mexico. The explosion was caused by a surge in oil and gas. The blowout preventer system of valves (BOP) at the well head on the seabed is believed to have failed.

April 22 2010: Oil rig sinks and riser pipe that connected it to the well falls to the seabed. Oil and gas continue to flow from the pipe and blowout preventer. This caused a five mile (8km) oil slick.

Many efforts are made to contain the leak including booms, skimming, dispersion (chemicals break down oil), and burning.

May 2 2010: BP starts drilling one of two relief wells.

May 5 2010: BP successfully stops one leak.

May 16 2010: Starts drilling other well. The wells are expected to take two or three months to complete

May 16 2010: A tube is inserted into the leaking pipe, which funnels oil to surface.

May 26 2010 - May 29 2010 Top kill system starts and fails

June 2: Lower a cap over blowout preventer to funnel oil to surface. Leaky pipe is cut off. The cap does not fit quite right, but does save some oil.

June 16 2010: Engineers open a second route to surface by connecting another pipe, which connects to another rig.

July 10 2010: LMRP cap is removed to be replaced with a tightly fitting cap.

July 15: The valves inside are turned off and the flow is stopped for the first time since 20 April.

August 5 2010: Mud and cement pumped in to block well.

Key players
US Congress
Media
Transocean chief executive Steve Newman
Henry Waxman, chairman of the House Energy and Commerce
BP CEO Tony Hayward

Key Terms
Deep Horizon Oil Rig: owned and mostly staffed by employees of exploration firm Transocean, under contract to BP

Centralisers:These devices make sure that the pipe or casing is centralised during cementing, to ensure a good job is done

Cement bond log: A sonic scanning device is lowered through the well on a wireline. It checks whether there are imperfections in bonding or other problems in the cement. If there are, more cement can be squeezed into affected sections.

Liner: a bit of casing hung from the bottom of the casing section above. Inside this would have been a further piece of tubing called a "Tieback".

The blowout preventer (BOP):  is supposed to stop this happening. The BOP, the size of a five-storey building, consists of a series of high-pressure valves, designed to prevent such a surge or kick from damaging the drilling operation. In this BOP, built by US firm Cameron to specifications by Transocean, there are five ram-type preventers and two annular preventers, according to Transocean's chief executive.


Blind ram shear: Last line of defence in BOP - cuts pipe

Annulus: Gap between pipe and rock, or between pipe and another pipe

Step 3:
We didn't really have time to share information during class.

Step 4:
WHOI Scientist or technical specialist

Step 5:
I am an environmental scientist whose focus is on the effects of the oil spill on populations and communities of organisms. I believe that the oil spill crisis will not be over until the negative effects are repared. This could take decades. For example, according to tests conducted in 2007 on a Cape Cod beach affected by the 1969 oil spill, fiddler crabs were negatively affected by oil even 38 years after the spill.

Questions:
BP: How do you plan to fix the damage done to the underwater ecosystems by oil pollution an chemical pollution caused by the spill?

Activists: Do you expect the organisms of the coastal region to fully recover based on their tolerance to previous habitat-related threats?

Gulf Folk: What effects on the gulf fauna have you noticed? What do you expect the long term effects of this spill to be on your career as a whole?

Government: What action do you plan to take where repairing ecosystemic damage is concerned?