Evaluate perspectives in a TOK essay

Anchor the discussion in your prescribed title

The TOK essay responds to one of the six prescribed titles issued for your examination session. Confirm the exact title with your teacher, copy it accurately into your planning document and identify any specified areas of knowledge or other conditions. The essay has a maximum of 1,600 words, so choose examples that allow focused analysis.

Underline the terms that shape the question. Write provisional meanings and consider whether those meanings vary between the areas of knowledge you will discuss. Keep your interpretation useful to the title rather than opening with a dictionary list.

Build perspectives around reasons

A perspective needs more than a sentence beginning 'some people disagree.' State what the view claims, why it is plausible and what evidence or assumptions it depends on. Then ask what would weaken it. This gives you material to evaluate rather than merely alternate between opposing statements.

As an illustrative planning exercise, consider whether disagreement should reduce confidence in a knowledge claim. One view might treat disagreement among informed researchers as evidence of unresolved uncertainty. Another might see some disagreement as an expected part of testing explanations. Use such reasoning only where it helps answer your actual prescribed title.

Choose examples that expose the reasoning

Use a specific, verifiable example and explain enough context for the reader to understand the knowledge issue. Identify the method, evidence or interpretive decision being examined. A familiar event can work well if you know which detail matters. An impressive event with uncertain facts can weaken the argument.

For the disagreement exercise, a scientific case might distinguish conflicting measurements from competing interpretations of the same results. A historical case might examine how source selection changes an interpretation. Research the actual cases before making claims about what experts concluded.

Compare views using an explicit basis

Decide what makes one view more convincing in this context: stronger evidence, a more suitable method, clearer scope or better handling of uncertainty. Explain that basis and apply it to both perspectives. You may find that each view works under different conditions. A qualified judgment is useful when those conditions are explained.

For instance, disagreement caused by unreliable measurements may justify a different response from disagreement about the values used to select a research priority. Show how the distinction changes your answer to the title rather than leaving it as an interesting aside.

Consider what follows from your judgment

Ask what your argument implies for the production, communication or acceptance of knowledge. If confidence should depend on the source of disagreement, a knower needs to inspect how that disagreement arose. Explain the consequence and its limits. Avoid expanding into a new debate that the remaining essay cannot support.

• Connect each example to a claim and the prescribed title.
• Evaluate a perspective's reasons and limitations.
• Explain meaningful similarities or differences between areas of knowledge.
• Let the conclusion reflect the conditions established in the discussion.

Check the argument as a whole

Write a one-sentence summary of what each paragraph contributes. Read those sentences together and check whether the argument develops a coherent answer. Remove repetition, verify factual details and acknowledge sources. Use the feedback arrangements permitted by your teacher. No fixed number of claims, counterclaims or examples can substitute for a clear discussion of your chosen title.