Relating TOK with Chemistry

In chemistry, we recently learned about entropy. This is the concept that the universe tends towards disorder rather than order. If you take this out of a science context, it can be related to TOK slightly. I think people have been trying to establish order into the world bit by bit over time. Buildings, telephones, cars, etc. All technological advancements are proof of this. Even the fact that the idea of entropy was created is evidence of this, since it is a scientific advancement. But if you look at the definition of entropy, that the universe tends towards a disordered state, does that mean that humans are unnatural beings? We try to bring more order into this world, thinking that it will probably be better that way. However, according to this law, we are breaking the natural way of how the universe tends to be in disorder rather than order.

The Point of Life

I read about a theory once (but forgot the name) that the materialistic world doesn't exist at all. Instead, every organism is just a single consciousness that exists in a universe full of these consciousnesses. So, our bodies are just the imaginations that our minds have created in this non-physical world. I don't exactly believe in this, not because I am against this belief, but simply because it is too complex for me to comprehend. For me to understand something, I have to pretend that it is true in my mind, but how can I do that when I have to imagine nothingness in everything? So, I have come to the conclusion that somewhat agrees with this but not entirely.

In my opinion, it doesn't matter whether the physical world is "real" or not. If I die, in the hypothetical world of this theory, the effects will still be the same as the effects in the "real" material world. In my opinion, this theory has a somewhat negative view of life. The world as we know is largely the physical world, and yet, it is saying that it is pointless. But then it made me question if that was important at all. Whether it's real or not doesn't matter at all.

All of the consciousnesses that exist may or may not coincide with each other, to form the material world that we know. Or, we could each have a world to ourselves that was created with our consciousnesses individually. This doesn't matter to me either. Why should I wonder about the world of others if I cannot do anything to it? And let's say that I do care. What then? I don't know. In my opinion, this theory made me have a dark realization that, in the end, nothing may matter at all.

Education

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zDZFcDGpL4U

Watching this video from class was a unique experience for me. Ken Robinson questioned and proposed that we defy the traditional education system that has been set up in the modern world so that it is adapted to a modern society. We no longer live in the Industrial Age, when public education for everyone was just being established. In order to reform the educational system, I think that Ken Robinson meant to say that the world has changed since then, so we must change with it instead of staying with the old system. There are a lot of distractions in this world that make students unable to focus, and yet if this happens, we are punished. As standardized testing quantities increase, so do the number of people prescribed with ADHD.

What this shows me in relation to imagination as a way of knowing is that maybe knowledge is emphasized more. In school, we learn about facts: enthalpy changes, trigonometry, American history, and so much more. But for all we know, it might all be wrong. Revolutionary ideas such as the fact that there might be more stuff inside of the atom change our whole knowledge system. And if you ask what the source of these great ideas is, it is almost always the same: imagination.

So here is how I see the educational system that I experience everyday: pre-existing knowledge that was conjured in the minds of scholars is repeatedly taught to me. However, my ability to think off of us through my imagination is hardly required as a tool. Why do I need to figure out the reason for why this equation is true when people have done it for me already? What if it's wrong? No one really cares though, because most people don't doubt knowledge that is agreed upon.

The problem is that I simply don't know an easy and possible way to change the education system. I'm not a powerful person or a genius like Einstein whose words may actually be enough to bring this change. Still, I am unsure if even these kinds of people would be able to think of a way to change a system that has been used for centuries. Even if we look past the Industrial Age, education has mostly been in the form of learning more about knowledge to expand this, rather than using imagination as a tool to do the same tasks in a more independent way. People like Ken Robinson have identified the source of the issue, but I wonder if anyone has a solution.

Imagination vs. Knowledge

This post is based on the following discussion:
http://www.ted.com/conversations/11887/is_imagination_creativity_more.html

In my opinion, this was sort of like the question, "What came first: the chicken or the egg?" It asks what the origin is of two fundamentally important mental tools. Is knowledge first because it is "all we know and understand"? Or is imagination first because it encompasses everything to know? This is a very tricky question to ask and to answer. I think that knowledge is what originally existed, as imagination is the "recreation" of what we know. If there was nothing to exist in the first place, what would we recreate in our minds? Thus, imagination is a tool that is an extension of knowledge, rather than being an original tool of our minds.

However, imagination is the more important of the two. Imagination is what allows humans to "see" rather than just "look." We can understand or at least process our knowledge with imagination. So, although it can be said that it can not survive without the existence of knowledge, imagination is still the more important of the two.

Imagination

One of the most important mental tools that humans have might be our abilities to imagine. I think it's what separates us from other animals who are only capable of thinking of very basic instincts. If they are hungry, then they must find food to eat. If they are thirsty, they need to find water to drink. If they are tired, then they must sleep. But most humans don't function so simply.

These things are just survival instincts, but imagination allows us to have more complex psychological thought processes. Without doing anything but closing my eyes and focusing, I can imagine that I am the king of the world with a castle full of servants. I can also pretend I am a beggar on the streets in the same way. This power that we have as humans is what allowed us to advance past other animals. They are only interested in their own survival, but the imagination inside of us may be what caused curiosity.

How many bricks can I stack on top of each other to create more floors in this building? What happens if I combine two sticks to make a compass? Is it possible to divide this number rather than simply subtracting from it to make it smaller? All of these questions and countless more made us go one step further at a time to amount to the civilisation that we are today.

Shintoism

Shintoism is the most popular religion in Japan, along with Buddhism. It is focused on the worship of invisible beings and powers called Kami. They are not gods but spirits that are present in our world. Shintoism states that if Kami are treated well, then they will come into our lives to bring goodness.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/religions/shinto/ataglance/glance.shtml

I believe Shintoism is more closely related to Epistemological solipsism than it is to rationalism or empiricism. Rationalism is concerned with using information that is intellectually deduced, but with this religion, this isn't really the case. Since Shintoism is a belief system that was created with the shared ideas of different Japanese people, the religion was not "deduced" or rationalised, but just conjured within the minds of people. Empiricism is more focused on sensory details, such as having to be able to see or feel something to believe that it exists. This goes even further from Shintoism than Rationalism since with this religion is only about your mindset. People can only visualize the various Kami, but cannot actually see them. So, Epistemological solipsism is the only choice that remains. This concept is about the realm outside of our own minds, and how we know whether this is true or not. The conclusion is that we can't. In the same way, no one can know whether these Kami actually exist or not. Those who do believe in them will follow Shintoism, and those who don't believe in them will not follow this religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epistemological_solipsism

A strength of Epistemological solipsism is that it cannot be disproved when associated with Shintoism. No one has solid proof of the existence of Kami, nor does anyone have proof of their non-existence. So, any arguments made on either side can only be based on your own beliefs and your own mind, which is exactly what Epistemological solipsism is about.

This way of thinking and reasoning interests me a lot since it is so different from rationalism and empiricism, which are the two main ones that I'd known about. They are about the external environment, since they offer two different ways to explain your surroundings (deduction vs. sensory proof). However, Epistemological solipsism is about the internal environment, or more accurately, your own mind. There is no way to know that anything outside of this is true or exists at all, and I agree with this. I don't know if it is valid, nor will I ever know, which may be why I like this idea so much.

Facts and Opinions

I think that we're surrounded by facts too much of the time. Like the picture above, facts seem to have more power than opinions, which the image above shows. Facts are represented by the huge "FACTS" cannon. However, opinions are written in tiny letters on a revolver held by a short person. This man seems weak and even needs a step ladder to be able to come face to face with the cannon. Moreover, the "OPINION" pistol which is fired only fires a white flag, as if to symbolise surrender to the cannon. This cannon seems more dangerous than the pistol since there is a lit fuse on top, showing that it will soon destroy the man holding the "OPINIONS" pistol.

I agree with this image to a certain degree. Facts constitute a huge part of this world, and the personal opinions are usually only valued when they are based on facts. For example, Martin Luther King Jr. had very important thoughts and statements about racism and how it was a decaying factor of the world. While his opinions were valued and respected by many people, it remains true that they were based on facts about racism and discrimination.

My opinion is that we don't have a choice whether to like facts or not. Personal opinions have perpetual existence since imagination within human minds will exist forever. This is the source of opinions. However, facts surround us no matter what simply because any individual thought or opinion can be traced back down enough to concrete details.