Might there be a case for reconsidering the name Theory of Knowledge? It seems to me that there must be an inherent weakness in the current name given that we read and hear explanations along the lines of "T.O.K. has some connection to the branch of philosophical thought known as epistemology, but it is different." The IB definition of T.O.K. and the position of T.O.K. within the hexagon both underline its centrality to all knowledge and the great care taken within our subject to point out that it is not the study of philosophy. Why then, by giving it a name which is synonymous with epistemology, do we lead people into the trap of thinking that it is?
In linguistics, it is useful to differentiate between language and metalanguage, i.e. language about language. In Gödel; Escher & Bach, The Eternal Braid, Douglas Hofstadter stresses the distinction between mathematics and metamathematics. Is what we are doing in TOK not metaknowledge, i.e. an informed consideration of knowledge itself? Metaknowledge is a simple term which gives prominence to the auto-reflective nature of the subject, while suggesting no links to a particular branch of knowledge. Metaknowledge is a name I would like to put forward for consideration, if ever it were decided that, despite our affection for the name Theory of Knowledge, the subject Theory of Knowledge might benefit from having a new name.
|
