This photo was taken at my mother’s wedding on the 1st of June.
This is her third marriage.

According to the Oxford Dictionary, knowledge is the understanding of or information about a subject you get from experience or study, either known by one person or by people generally.
Belief describes the feeling of being certain that something exists or is true. Lastly, the word opinion is a thought or belief about something or someone

In my opinion, I believe that knowledge is everything. From listening to something on the radio to a friend telling you a story no matter the situation, you gain information, beliefs and opinions from those experiences.

Noting back to this photograph, according to the Christian Religion, once you marry someone, you are to “Love and cherish them for all eternity until death does us part”.
However, my dad is definitely not dead.

I know that my mom is happier in this marriage; I believe that my parents couldn’t have worked out, and in my opinion, I’m certain that remarrying is not a bad thing.
I believe that although each of these words has different meanings, they all come together to form one viewpoint and personality. If someone lacks one, they won’t have completed their full potential.
So if they are all connected, how can we distinguish the differences between each word?
Knowledge is everything. This includes opinion and belief, but these two words can be distinguished. This is because opinion has a reason behind it, while belief is true to you and not based on opinions or facts.
For example, in religion, you believe something is true without further facts. This could be the reason why many people go by the fact of only marrying once, even if it means you’re not happy within that relationship. They are willing to sacrifice happiness for what they believe in.

In conclusion, knowledge is an umbrella term for everything you think, believe and have an opinion on.
Even the dictionary mentions the word belief while describing what an opinion is.

Knowledge is defined as “facts, information and skills acquired through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject.” Or “awareness or familiarity gained by experience of a fact or situation.” In simpler terms, when we think of the knowledge in our heads, it’s really something we’ve been told and believed it to be true or something we’ve learnt from doing something. The knowledge we obtain through teaching and learning isn’t information we have perceived directly. We consider what we have been taught knowledge in the basis of two major factors- evidence and trust. Trust is defined as a “firm belief in the reliability, truth, or ability of someone or something.” Evidence is “the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid.” In Science- for example- for a new theory to come into affect, the information has to be tested and supported. This evidence verifies and consolidates this information to be “knowledge.” Without it, it doesn’t have a leg to stand on and (generally) becomes unreliable. This is where trust comes into play. Despite numbers and statistics as evidence, this so called knowledge we learn and acquire isn’t something we find upfront; it’s discovered by other individuals. This new information is then relayed down different channels of people before it reaches the point where you come across it. We hear it and are told it’s true; therefore, we subconsciously classify it as such. Can words not get lost in translation? Do different people not interpret different things differently? This shouldn’t affect us because we’ve already considered it as new knowledge. In a nutshell, knowledge isn’t limited given that trust isn’t limited. It takes many forms and many ways of getting to a certain point. This certain point isn’t the same for everyone; therefore, what’s considered knowledge isn’t the same for everyone.

Knowledge is acquired by the knower. This makes knowledge subjective as each individual will accept or reject knowledge in multiple different ways due to their different perspectives. This makes defining what counts as knowledge an incredibly difficult task.  

In this exhibition, I have used and highlighted the image of onion cells under a light microscope of x100 magnification. This image was taken from my IB biology class while we were examining cells. In today’s science, this image is presented as a form of knowledge because scientists (the knowers) have found this out and accepted (acquired) it. From their perspective, it’s true that onions are made of cells and that these cells look like the image above. However, scientists before the cell theory believed in the spontaneous generation theory (the idea that living organisms came to life out of non-living matter). This theory clashes with the cell theory therefore this image may not have been enough to be counted as knowledge for those scientists as it goes against their truth. This emphasizes the idea that knowledge (and what counts as knowledge) is subjective and depends on the individual’s values and whether the knowledge is true to them.  

This implies that anything could be knowledge even if it’s not true to an individual because it could be true to another individual. However, could false knowledge count as knowledge? For example, a lie could be counted as knowledge because the person who believes in the lie thinks it’s true therefore it’s knowledge to them. However, the person who told the lie knows it’s not true so they will have a different view on the situation. Perspectives could also change. For example, the person might find out their knowledge was false, causing them to reject the lie. This might make them stop counting the lie as knowledge as it no longer corresponds to the truth. A knower could also reject knowledge even if it still counts it as knowledge. For example, the person who was lied to finds out the truth but refuses to accept it as the truth. This could be the person rejecting the knowledge even though it very likely counts as knowledge.  

Overall, knowledge could be true, false and rejected and there are numerous ways to count knowledge. It could be just about anything.  

I think we can distinguish between knowledge, belief and opinion by using scientific methods in order to establish evidence and find out what’s a fact. The definition of fact is “a thing that is known or proved to be true.” and in order to prove its truthfulness objective evidence is needed, which can be obtained through science. For example, it has been acknowledged that the sky is blue, that is a fact. We know this is a fact because it has been scientifically proven blue light is scattered in all directions of the Earth’s atmosphere and is scattered more than any other colour light as it travels in shorter, smaller waves. However, blue-purple colour blind people see the sky as purple. To them, this may be considered a fact, but it is rather an opinion. What makes this an opinion is that the statement “the sky is purple” is true to them, because that’s what they see and therefore think , but it has not been scientifically proven. On the contrary, it has been scientifically proven that this person is colour blind, which is a fact, so although they may think the sky is purple, there is no proof, as their “proof” relies on the fact they’re colour blind and get blue and purple mixed up.

On the other hand, belief is not based on what you know or think, it is purely based on what you have faith in. It may be an acceptance that something is true, however, there is no evidence or proof confirming this which leaves it to be a belief rather than knowledge. For example, some may believe heaven is above us or in the sky, hence the phrase “they’re looking down on us” when referring to a passed love one. Nonetheless, there is no evidence that heaven is above us, as we cannot see it or prove it to be true using science; we are completely unaware of what happens to us when we die. Because there is no evidence it cannot be knowledge, but it isn’t opinion because it’s not something you think and that is specifically your take on something, it is belief as you have faith in it rather than assuming it is a straight fact.

So hypothetically, let’s say you’ve just had a bad cut on your knee after falling over during a walk. In this situation, would it be useful if I told you ‘Napoleon lost the battle of Waterloo on the 18th of June, 1815’? No. It would be more useful for me to tell you that I had plasters or dressing.

What I’m trying to say here is that knowledge is useful all-around, it is the context that specifies how useful that knowledge is, in another situation you could be taking a history paper with a napoleon question and the example of waterloo I gave earlier would be more useful then.

This can be applied universally, and even clickbait articles like ’12 facts that are completely useless’, can in some contexts have equal use as knowledge as any other. Even stories that are distorted, such as the Sun newspaper’s reporting on the Hillsborough disaster, can have use as knowledge.

In brief, a football stadium in Hillsborough was overcrowded and people were crushed as the game went on; trying to escape, people jumped over the barriers onto the pitch where the police overlooking to game beat them with their batons thinking the intention was malicious.

The Sun newspaper reported that it was entirely the football fans from Liverpool’s fault, and that they were ‘football hooligans’. This resulted in the Sun being frowned upon in the city, and the Sun newspaper even lost a few legal battles over the controversy. The knowledge of the distorted facts from the Sun’s reporting can be useful as it shows how Media can manipulate and audience, and it’s effect on whole communities of people.

In conclusion, this all shows that all knowledge can be useful no matter what, and it all depends on the context when it comes to what knowledge is more useful than the last.

This is a tweet composed by Donald Trump, in which he claims that climate change is not real. 

Finding a definition for the word “knowledge” is rather easy. According to the Oxford Dictionary, knowledge is “the information, understanding and skills that you gain through education or experience”. Defining what counts as knowledge, on the other hand, is trickier. 

In this tweet, Donald Trump states that climate change is not real, which is factually incorrect. Factual knowledge is the knowledge that can be evidenced by fact. Trump’s tweet is not factual as it is not based on evidence.  

Another question we have to ask in order to answer the main question is “does knowledge have to be factual?”. In my opinion, the answer to this question is no. Faith, for instance, is one of many other ways of knowing, that is not based on anything really except your own belief. Believing in God, for example, is not something everybody does. But for a person, who believes in God, God exists. And though this cannot be evidenced, it is a “fact” for the person, who believes that God is real. 

So, does Trump’s tweet count as knowledge? Yes, it does. This is because knowledge is information you gain through education. Making him think the way he thinks is probably because this is what he was taught. Furthermore, as explained above, knowledge does not have to be factual. Knowledge is rather a person’s own “fact”. 

In conclusion, Donald Trump’s tweet is knowledge and so is every other opinion, belief, fact and truth, etc. This is because there is always a reason for a person to think, what they think. This could be their education or their experiences. However, even though almost everything counts as knowledge, a knowledge that is not factual can potentially cause damage e.g., Donald Trump’s tweet about climate change not being real.  

I believe, knowledge is someone’s own truth or “fact” and is very much based on opinion as well as experiences. Moreover, there is no wrong knowledge as, considering the Oxford Dictionary’s definition of knowledge, which is “the information, understanding and skills that you gain through education or experience”, knowledge is simply what you personally experienced and therefore, everything you know is knowledge. 

Knowledge can be anything such as religion or belief this is knowledge because it is what people have thought for millions of years and what people keep thinking this creates a sense that that is correct. My expedition for example is Cristo rei in Lisbon Portugal this has been up since 1959 which is most of our lifetimes this gives people like a reason to believe as why would someone build a statue so large and so time consuming if it had no deeper meaning?
I think this statue was built as a sacrifice of time and resources to show how they want to represent their religion.
Knowledge can also be opinion which what everyone believes this could be caused by not being educate or just never being exposed to things like how some kid which have been surrounded by war ever since they were born then they might not know a world where bombs and gunshots are going of everywhere.
Knowledge can also be facts and be proven by science this include things like how coronavirus is a virus this is proven after extensive testing on characteristic and how the cell is made which many years back couldn’t of been proven this can mean that technology advancing has allowed us to use stuff light x rays and microscopes to see things we would of never seen like little bone fractures or how large a bacteria is very accurately all due to advances it technology which have proven ideas or theories but also have falsified theories and ideas which made new thing been proven.
Knowledge can also be experiences like how maybe one day you saw a squirrel for the first time, and it was a red squirrel so until you found out that there where many types of squirrels whenever someone asked what colour was a squirrel that person that has only ever seen a red squirrel then they will get the image that the squirrel is red and replay with the wrong answer.

In this question I’m going to be exploring the meaning of knowledge, and if we can ever truly know something in order to draw a boundary between things that are known and that aren’t.

To answer this question, we must first consider : what is knowledge? The dictionary defines it as “facts, information, and skills acquired through experience or education; the theoretical or practical understanding of a subject. ” Taking this meaning, we see that knowledge is directly related to experience. In practice, the application of our senses allow us to interpret and know what objects lie around us due to what we’e been told they are called previously, say at school or by our parents. However, this implies we can only know and grasp concepts which fit with our preexisting truths or “knowledge” ( Coherent Truth ). The problem should be becoming clear – how is this knowledge reliable? If I base my knowledge off of what I’ve been taught how do I know what I was taught wasn’t wrong? It needed only to coincide with the teachers’ prior knowledge in order to seem appropriate to teach to me. All over the world, people are raised in different conditions and with different values and different learning processes. Take my painting, for example. I may tell you it is unfinished, but I may be lying because I want it to appear this way. Your social experience and knowledge of paintings and my painting history will have to be used in order to determine whether I am telling the truth or not. This truth validates the knowledge I’ve given you, letting you “know” it as you have evidence for it. In the end, each of you will form a different opinion on whether I tell the truth and thus gain different knowledge.

What I’ve proven is that none of us know things in the same way – knowledge is not a shared in its exact form between individuals – and thus there is no boundary to knowledge. Since we rely on each other’s words, our shared knowledge of their meaning and whether they are telling the truth, there can be infinite interpretations of things we see firsthand and things we are told. It even extends to the imagination. I may know in my mind what something is, but you can’t reliably know if it is the case if I tell you, or exactly imagine and know what describe : there are too many factors of uncertainty.

That painting is my most recent IB artwork, (spoilers, it is actually unfinished!) and I decided to use it since it ties well into opinion and knowledge – visual stimuli always causes great debate and is easy proof that we all see differently, and thus can never know the same things in the same way.

To conclude, if we can’t know things in the same way – our thoughts and concepts are always subjective and influenced – then there is no baseline knowledge and thus no boundary to the interpreted knowledge. We have no way of truly identifying the nature of something in an objective way, thus even the meaning of knowledge itself is speculation. We aren’t limited to what is and isn’t, because we cannot agree on a foundation of knowledge.

Ivan Sproats.

Knowledge is generally classified as what you learn and understand, but also what is true or scientifically proven. Your knowledge can come from numerous places such as friends, family, school or even personal experiences that have impacted you and that you have learned valuable lessons from; these experiences can be positive or negative. But does that mean that all knowledge has to be proven in order for it to be true or reliable? The picture I have chosen to answer this question and reflect upon the discussion is from a castle I have visited last summer at home, in Romania. This relates to history which is an area of knowledge that studies the past; history may contain certain truths, but cannot be 100% proven as we have not lived in the times of the events to have an authentic experience. However, the truth of history is established by reconstructing small events and placing those facts together in order to form truth or something very close to it.

In most cases such as what you learn in school for example an experiment in chemistry will require a stable and precise outcome to what has already been proven by scientists. But what about your personal experiences? The way you behave or speak to an individual can have positive or negative outcomes depending on that individuals perspective on your interaction. For example if during an argument with your parents you choose to raise your voice and disregard their boundaries or views on the subject that is being discussed you may risk getting grounded or having your phone taken off of you. Although this isn’t necessarily proven if it happens you now know that you need to be aware how you treat and behave around others, therefore it counts as knowledge because you have experienced it and you know the outcomes which in most cases are true.

Knowledge also comes from within and this can be things you learn on your own such as the example I gave above. People can also do this by having hobbies that they do often such as painting which is a process that you keep learning from regardless of what you have been taught or how much experience you had previously and in my opinion you can make no mistakes with art its just a matter of perspective and belief; science on the other hand is pretty much exact.

Therefore anything you believe is true due to you experiencing it is ultimately true. It might not be true to others as they have different life experiences that might not prove if the subject is true or not, but that doesn’t make it invalid and in some cases it doesn’t have to be proven for it to be true.