Siyu TOK Essay: "Do good explanations have to be true?"

Get Started. It's Free
or sign up with your email address
Rocket clouds
Siyu TOK Essay: "Do good explanations have to be true?" by Mind Map: Siyu TOK Essay: "Do good explanations have to be true?"

1. Keywords

1.1. good

1.1.1. to be desired or approved of

1.1.2. having the required qualities; of a high standard

1.1.3. beneficial to someone or something

1.2. explanation

1.2.1. a statement or account that makes something clear

1.3. true

1.3.1. in accordance with fact or reality

1.3.1.1. reality: the state of things as they actually exist

1.3.2. accurate or exact

2. Key Phrases

2.1. good explanations

2.1.1. explanations that are desirable for their clarification of something or their benefits to someone/something

3. Rewrite

3.1. Can explanations only be clear and beneficial when they reflect the state of things as they actually exist?

4. Rewrite

4.1. Natural sciences

4.1.1. Is an explanation worth its value in encouraging knowledge production in natural science given that it has potential real life drawbacks? Does an explanation helps to clarify a scientific concept or theory in a suitable way for the specific readers they are aiming at to understand?

4.2. Mathematics

4.2.1. How valuable is an explanation in promoting mathematical reasoning and clarifying the logic itself?

5. Connections to Classes

5.1. Biology

5.1.1. AOK: Natural Sciences

5.1.2. RLE/PK Connections

5.1.2.1. RLE: Many scientists argue that life was most likely to have originated from deep sea hydrothermal vents, after eliminating other unlikely possibilities, which have prevailed for decades.

5.1.2.1.1. WOK: reason

5.1.2.1.2. Framework Area: Historical Development

5.1.2.2. RLE: Modern pathology was not fully developed until the 19th when pathogens were discovered to be the real cause of diseases, rather than "spiritual agents" as previously believed.

5.1.2.2.1. WOK: memory

5.1.2.2.2. Framework Area: Scope and Application

5.2. Chemistry

5.2.1. AOK: Natural Sciences

5.2.2. RLE/PK Connections

5.2.2.1. PK: The SAT subject test chemistry book explained that network solids do not consist of "individual molecules" but "atoms joined to form molecules that attract each other". This confuses me because individual molecules attract each other as well.

5.2.2.1.1. WOK: language

5.2.2.1.2. Framework Area: Concepts/Language

5.2.2.2. Connection

5.2.2.2.1. WOK

5.2.2.2.2. Framework Area

5.3. Mathematics

5.3.1. AOK: Mathematics

5.3.2. RLE/PK Connections

5.3.2.1. RLE: Mathematical fallacies, or mistaken proofs of obvious contradictions with subtle errors in conditional steps, are often exhibited. Resolutions of these fallacies can lead to a deeper understanding in the subject.

5.3.2.1.1. WOK: reason

5.3.2.1.2. Framework Area: Methodology

5.3.2.2. Connection

5.3.2.2.1. WOK

5.3.2.2.2. Framework Area