At the centre of the course is the idea of knowledge questions.

These are questions such as:

what counts as evidence for X?
what makes a good explanation in subject Y?
how do we judge which is the best model of Z?
how can we be sure of W?
what does theory T mean in the real world?
how do we know whether it is right to do S?
While these questions could seem slightly intimidating in the abstract, they become much more accessible
when dealt with in specific practical contexts within the TOK course. They arise naturally in the subject
areas, the extended essay and CAS. The intention is that these contexts provide concrete examples of
knowledge questions that should promote student discussion.
Discussion forms the backbone of the TOK course. Students are invited to consider knowledge questions
against the backdrop of their experiences of knowledge in their other Diploma Programme subjects but
also in relation to the practical experiences offered by CAS and the formal research that takes place for
the extended essay. The experiences of the student outside school also have a role to play in these
discussions, although TOK seeks to strike a balance between the shared and personal aspects of
knowledge.
Recognizing the discursive aspect of the course, the TOK presentation assesses the ability of the student
to apply TOK thinking to a real-life situation. The TOK essay gives the opportunity to assess more formal
argumentation prompted by questions of a more general nature.
TOK is a course in critical thinking but it is one that is specifically geared to an approach to knowledge
that is mindful of the interconnectedness of the modern world. Critical in this context implies an
analytical approach prepared to test the support for knowledge claims, aware of its own weaknesses,
conscious of its perspectives and open to alternative ways of answering knowledge questions. It is a
demanding course but one that is an essential component not only of the Diploma Programme but of
lifelong learning.
Knowledge questions
TOK is primarily concerned with knowledge questions. This phrase is used often in describing what is
seen in a good TOK presentation or a good TOK essay. An essay or presentation that does not identify
and treat a knowledge question has missed the point. It also occurs in the assessment descriptors that
examiners use to mark the essay and that the teacher uses to mark the presentation. To put it briefly, the
whole point of the presentation and essay tasks is to deal with knowledge questions.
Knowledge questions are questions about knowledge, and contain the following features.

 Knowledge questions are questions about knowledge. Instead of focusing on specific content, they
focus on how knowledge is constructed and evaluated. In this sense, knowledge questions are a little
different from many of the questions dealt with in the subject classrooms. In this way, they are considered
second-order questions in TOK.
Knowledge questions are open in the sense that there are a number of plausible answers to them. The
questions are contestable. Dealing with open questions is a feature of TOK. Many students encountering
TOK for the first time are struck by this apparent difference from many of the other classes in their school
experience. Many find the lack of a single right answer slightly disorienting. Nevertheless, knowledge
questions underlie much of the knowledge that we take for granted. Much of the disagreement and
controversy encountered in daily life can be traced back to a knowledge question. An understanding of
the nature of knowledge questions can allow a deeper understanding of these controversies.
Knowledge questions should be expressed in general terms, rather than using subject-specific terms.
For example, instead of a question focusing on a specific model in development economics, such as the
Harrod-Domar model, a knowledge question might focus on the reliability of modelling as a method of
gaining knowledge in economics. It might be worth considering and discussing with students why
questions of knowledge are open and therefore so interesting. Why is it that the typical TOK question
does not have one straightforward correct answer? Students might find themselves facing this sort of
question in class. Perhaps a typical response might start with it depends what we mean by ... In other
words, the first task in trying to answer a TOK question is to establish an understanding of the key
concepts involved. There may be a number of different ways of thinking about these concepts. Each
might give rise to a different analysis and ultimately a different answer to the question. It is inevitable that
personal perspectives will play a part in the judgments made in any analysis. The intellectual resources
that each of us has to draw upon might well be different and lead us to different or even diametrically
opposed conclusions.
The possibility of a lack of unanimity in answering TOK questions can be initially challenging for
students. After all, in mathematics a student getting a different answer to his or her neighbour can be a
cause for concern, prompting the thought that one or other has made a mistake. In a TOK question it is
perfectly conceivable that the answers differ. What is important is that the analysis is thorough and that
there are good reasons to back it up. It is possible that both conclusions are true. It is tempting to explain
the plurality of good answers to knowledge questions in terms of a type of truth relativism: it is just a
matter of perspective. A more likely explanation is that different interpretations of key ideas account for
the different conclusions or that the weighting of different factors in the argument differ.
Knowledge questions are general questions about knowledge

Another challenging aspect of TOK is the requirement that a knowledge question is somehow more
general than the particular examples which illustrate it. This requirement springs from the idea that TOK
deals with second-order questions.
For example:
In physics, one deals with questions about the material world. In TOK, we ask questions about
knowledge in physics. How can the physicist be sure of his or her conclusions given that they are based
on hypothesis and experiment? The student in TOK is not talking in physical terms because he or she is
not talking about the physical world but the discipline of physics. Therefore, it is necessary to use a
different, more generalized vocabulary. The physicist uses terms like particle, energy, mass and charge. In
TOK, the student uses terms such as hypothesis, experimental data, interpretation, anomaly, induction,
certainty, uncertainty, belief and knowledge. So knowledge questions should employ these terms, not the
terms of physics.
This distinction can be seen in the following diagram.

Examples of knowledge questions

You can find knowledge questions underlying almost any issue. They are sometimes difficult to formulate
precisely but they often lurk underneath popular and often controversial subjects that are discussed in the
media, for example. It is a very useful exercise to try to tease out knowledge questions underlying articles
in the media.
Here are two examples of a topic that has been discussed in newspaper articles and possible knowledge
questions associated with the topic.
Example 1: Future population growth in Africa
Not a knowledge question: How can we predict future population growth in Africa? This is not a
knowledge question because it is a technical question within the discipline of population studies.
Good knowledge question: How can a mathematical model give us knowledge even if it does not yield
accurate predictions? This is now sufficiently general and explores the purpose and nature of
mathematical modelling.
Example 2: The placebo effect and its impact on the medical profession
Not a knowledge question: How does the placebo effect work? An answer to this might involve a
technical explanation in psychology. This therefore sits above the line in figure 4.
A good knowledge question: How could we establish that X is an active ingredient in causing Y?

This question is actually a rather general one about how we can know about causal links. It is a classic
knowledge question.
Knowledge Questions
Theory of knowledge is primarily concerned with knowledge questions. This phrase is used often in
describing what is meant by a good TOK Presentation or a good TOK essay. An essay or presentation that
does not identify and treat a knowledge question has missed the point. It also occurs in the assessment
descriptors that examiners use to mark the essay and that the teacher uses to mark the presentation. To put
it briefly: the whole point of the presentation and essay tasks is to deal with knowledge questions.
What exactly is a knowledge question?
A knowledge question is an open question about knowledge. It sounds simple but this innocent sounding
statement contains a couple of important subtleties. First, the question is open in the sense that there are a
number of plausible answers to it. The question is contestable. Dealing with open questions is a feature of
TOK. Many students encountering TOK for the first time are struck by this apparent difference from
many of the other classes in their school experience. Many find the lack of a single right answer slightly
disorienting. Nevertheless, knowledge questions underlie much of the knowledge that we take for granted.
Much of the disagreement and controversy encountered in daily life can be traced back to a knowledge
question. An understanding of the nature of knowledge questions can allow a deeper understanding of
these controversies.
But there is a second point that is worth unpacking. Knowledge questions are about knowledge. That is,
they are not questions of knowledge themselves but instead focus on the methods and mechanisms that
produce knowledge in TOK terminology they focus on ways of knowing and knowledge frameworks.
In this sense knowledge questions are a little different from many of the questions dealt with in the
subject classrooms. They are second order questions.
To illustrate this consider a few examples. What is the atomic mass of Hydrogen? is not a knowledge
question. It fails on both counts. It has a definite answer: 1 which is not controversial and it is an actual
statement of Physics rather than being about knowledge in Physics. What makes knowledge questions
controversial is that they often depend crucially on the contested understanding of one or other key idea
leaving room for disagreement.

So what about: Is Rembrandt a better painter than Maxfield Parrish? This is not a knowledge issue. It is
true that there is now some room for controversy. But there is still a problem. While there is knowledge
involved in making the judgment which is the better painter the question is not specifically about
knowledge. It is about painting. But surely we can fix this: How can we know if Rembrandt is a better
painter than Maxfield Parrish? This is getting closer. Now the object of the question is knowledge. But it
could still be argued that this is not a knowledge issue (or at least not a very good one). The reason is
rather subtle. Imagine what an answer might look like. We can know that Rembrandt is a better painter
by observing how each handles light, composition, and texture. We can observe the subject matter and the
composition. The problem here is that the answer is couched in the language of painting even though
this language clearly articulates some sort of knowledge. This is still rather too specific. It is local to the
particular comparison being suggested. What we are looking for is a somewhat more general question. In
particular we are looking for a question that is a second order question: a question about the nature of
artistic knowledge rather than a question of artistic knowledge. A better knowledge question would be:

What sort of knowledge, if any, is expressed by an artwork? This is a good knowledge question because it
is couched in general terms that do not refer to anything too local.

It follows that a third requirement for a question to be a knowledge question is that is couched in general
terms. The question should not be local to a specific example but should use sufficiently general
language. Where the line should be drawn is a matter of judgment. But the rough rule should be that in a
TOK context the knowledge question should not use specialised vocabulary specific to a particular area of
knowledge. How can a Physicist know whether the Higgs boson exists? sounds like a good knowledge
question in Physics but is probably too specific to be a good knowledge question in TOK which is
concerned with the more general matter of How do Physicists use theoretical predictions in producing
knowledge?. Specific open questions about knowledge crop up within the subject disciplines
and are properly dealt with there but they have to be made somewhat more general to be the raw material
of TOK.

Why this definition of knowledge question?

It might be worth considering why questions of knowledge are indeed open (and therefore interesting).
Why is it that the typical TOK question does not have one straightforward correct answer? TOK students
might find themselves facing this sort of question in class. Perhaps a typical response might start: it
depends what we mean by ... In other words, the first task in trying to answer a TOK question is to
establish an understanding of the key concepts involved. There may be a number of different ways of
thinking about these concepts. Each might give rise to a different analysis and ultimately a different
answer to the question. Perhaps, the students own personal situation and experience might influence the
way in which the question is interpreted. Inevitably in complex and messy real life personal perspectives
will play a part in the judgments that any analysis throws up. The intellectual resources that each of us has
to draw upon might well be different and lead us to different or even diametrically opposed conclusions.

The degree of sensitivity of areas of knowledge to considerations of perspective might depend on the
nature of the area of knowledge itself it might depend on the knowledge framework. Such controversies
exist and are usually eventually resolved using the framework.

It is clear that personal knowledge is particularly susceptible to perspective the self corrective
mechanisms are arguably weaker and it is not clear how conflicts resulting from knowledge questions
can be resolved. A good first step might be for the individual to cultivate an awareness of the particular
biographical facts that might contribute to perspective such as culture, gender, political assumptions,
religious beliefs and so on.
The possibility of a lack of unanimity in answering TOK questions might be a worry. After all, in
Mathematics a student getting a different answer to her neighbour can be the cause for concern prompting
the thought that you have made a mistake (or that the neighbour has). In a TOK question it is perfectly

conceivable that the answers differ. What is important is that the analysis is thorough and that there are
good reasons to back it up. It is possible that both conclusions are true.
It is tempting to explain the plurality of good answers to knowledge questions in terms of a type of truthrelativism: it all depends on ones perspective. A more likely explanation is that different interpretations
of key ideas account for the different conclusions or that the weightings of different factors in the
argument is slightly different. Ultimately the TOK student and her neighbour might have answered very
slightly different questions.

Perhaps more mysterious is the requirement that a knowledge question is somehow more general than the
particular examples which illustrate it. This requirement springs from this idea that TOK deals with
second order questions. For example in Physics one deals with questions about the material world. In
TOK we ask questions about Physics itself. How can the Physicist be sure of her conclusions given that
they are based on hypothesis and experiment? The TOK student is not talking in Physical terms because
she is not talking about the physical world but the areas of knowledge Physics. Therefore it is necessary
to use a different more generalised vocabulary. The physicist uses terms like particle, energy, mass and
charge. The TOK student uses terms such as hypothesis, experimental data, interpretation, anomaly,
induction, certainty, uncertainty, belief and knowledge. So, knowledge questions should employ these
terms not the terms of Physics.