Inside the Nazi Mind at the Nuremberg Trials

By Thomas Harding
I have been thinking about these questions ever since I found out that my great-uncle, Hanns Alexander, a German Jew, was a Nazi Hunter. At the end of the Second World War he tracked down and caught one of the worst mass murderers of all time, Rudolf Höss, the Kommandant of Auschwitz. 

These were also the questions that a team of American psychologists and psychiatrists were directed to answer during the Nuremberg Trials that opened on November 20, 1945, six months after the war’s end.

Charges of crimes against humanity were read out against 24 of the highest-ranking Nazis then in captivity, including Ernst Kaltenbrunner, chief of the Reich Security Main Office and the highest-ranking SS officer after Himmler’s death.

With so many senior Nazis held in one place at the same time, the Americans instructed a panel of psychologists to conduct exten­sive interviews and tests with the defendants. Such horrific crimes were committed surely by damaged men, men different in some fundamental way from the rest of humanity.

Among the defendants examined was Rudolf Höss, the Kommandant of Auschwitz. Unlike the others held in Nuremberg, Höss had been intimately involved in the design and day-to-day operations of the extermination camps. 

First he was visited by Gustave Gilbert, a New Yorker born to Jewish-Austrian immigrants. Gilbert later wrote about his meeting with the Kommandant in his 1947 book Nuremberg Diary.

Gilbert asked for a brief career summary, and was surprised when Höss admitted in an unemotional tone that he had been responsible for the deaths of more than two and a half million Jews.

The American asked how it was possible to kill so many people. “Technically,” answered Höss, “that wasn’t so hard—it would not have been hard to exterminate even greater numbers.” Gilbert then pressed him for an emotional response, but Höss continued in a similar tone: “At the time there were no consequences to consider. It didn’t occur to me that I would be held responsible. You see, in Germany it was understood that if something went wrong, then the man who gave the orders was responsible.” Gilbert started to ask, “But what about the human—” before Höss interrupted, “That just didn’t enter into it.” After a few more questions, Höss said, “I suppose you want to know in this way if my thought and habits are normal.” “Well, what do you think?” Gilbert asked. “I am entirely normal,” said Höss. “Even while I was doing the extermination work, I led a normal family life.”

Read the rest at: http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/09/07/inside-the-nazi-mind-at-the-nuremberg-trials.html

Growing Brains...

Scientists at the Institute of Molecular Biotechnology in Vienna, Austria, have grown three-dimensional human brain tissues from stem cells. The tissues form discrete structures that are seen in the developing brain.

The Vienna researchers found that immature brain cells derived from stem cells self-organize into brain-like tissues in the right culture conditions. The “cerebral organoids,” as the researchers call them, grew to about four millimeters in size and could survive as long as 10 months. For decades, scientists have been able to take cells from animals including humans and grow them in a petri dish, but for the most part this has been done in two dimensions, with the cells grown in a thin layer in petri dishes. But in recent years, researchers have advanced tissue culture techniques so that three-dimensional brain tissue can grow in the lab. The new report from the Austrian team demonstrates that allowing immature brain cells to self-organize yields some of the largest and most complex lab-grown brain tissue, with distinct subregions and signs of functional neurons.

The work, published in Nature on Wednesday, is the latest advance in a field focused on creating more lifelike tissue cultures of neurons and related cells for studying brain function, disease, and repair. With a cultured cell model system that mimics the brain’s natural architecture, researchers would be able to look at how certain diseases occur and screen potential medications for toxicity and efficacy in a more natural setting, says Anja Kunze, a neuroengineer at the University of California, Los Angeles, who has developed three-dimensional brain tissue cultures to study Alzheimer’s disease.

The Austrian researchers coaxed cultured neurons to take on a three-dimensional organization using cell-friendly scaffolding materials in the cultures. The team also let the neuron progenitors control their own fate. “Stem cells have an amazing ability to self-organize,” said study first author Madeline Lancaster at a press briefing on Tuesday. Others groups have also recently seen success in allowing progenitor cells to self-organize, leading to reports of primitive eye structures, liver buds, and more (see “Growing Eyeballs” and “A Rudimentary Liver Is Grown from Stem Cells”).

The brain tissue formed discrete regions found in the early developing human brain, including regions that resemble parts of the cortex, the retina, and structures that produce cerebrospinal fluid. At the press briefing, senior authorJuergen Knoblich said that while there have been numerous attempts to model human brain tissue in a culture using human cells, the complex human organ has proved difficult to replicate. Knoblich says the proto-brain resembles the developmental stage of a nine-week-old fetus’s brain.

While Knoblich’s group is focused on developmental questions, other groups are developing three-dimensional brain tissue cultures with the hopes of treating degenerative diseases or brain injury. A group at Georgia Institute of Technology has developed a three-dimensional neural culture to study brain injury, with the goal of identifying biomarkers that could be used to diagnose brain injury and potential drug targets for medications that can repair injured neurons. “It’s important to mimic the cellular architecture of the brain as much as possible because the mechanical response of that tissue is very dependent on its 3-D structure,” says biomedical engineer Michelle LaPlaca of Georgia Tech. Physical insults on cells in a three-dimensional culture will put stress on connections between cells and supporting material known as the extracellular matrix, she says.

Other researchers are developing three-dimensional brain tissue cultures to approach fundamental questions about how the brain works. Utkan Demirci, a biomedical engineer at Harvard Medical School and a 2006 MIT Technology Review Innovator Under 35, reported earlier this year that microfabrication techniques enabled his group to construct three-dimensional neuron cultures. Demirci’s lab is now using electrical recordings and other functional studies to show that there is synaptic activity amongst the neurons. “When you culture these cells in three dimensions, then the arms of the neurons can extend as they do in native tissues and build a circuit,” he says. “Once we show these are functional, we can do a lot of interesting studies with them, including explore brain mapping studies.”

After confirming the success of their methods with mouse stem cells, Knoblich, Lancaster, and colleagues used the methods to study a human developmental genetic disorder that causes microcephaly, a condition in which brain size is markedly reduced and is associated with severe cognitive disabilities. The team worked with a pediatric neurologist to obtain skin cells from a patient with microcephaly. From these cells, the team created induced pluripotent stem cells (see “TR10: Engineered Stem Cells”). The researchers then genetically reprogrammed these cells into primitive neurons and, with a few steps, cultured them into a cerebral organoid in which they were able to glean hints of the origin of the disease.

In the future, the team would like to use the brain tissue system to study schizophrenia and autism—cognitive disorders that are usually diagnosed in adolescents or adults but are thought to begin in early brain development.

http://www.technologyreview.com/news/518716/researchers-grow-3-d-human-brain-tissues/

Sem. 2, Week 2: Language Socratic Seminar

This week we introduced the TOK topics inherent in literature.  In teams, students discussed the plot details of their book pertaining to the kinds of Problems of Knowledge we have encountered in class.  

We noticed a clear pattern and some archetypal themes emerge, no matter the novel/author:

1.  Ethics and conflict seem central to narrative
2.  The style of writing usually complimented the type of story being discussed.
3.  Character emotion and historical context play important roles in the understanding of the novel.

We also completed a Socratic Seminar on the motion: “Language is the greatest Area/Way of Knowing”.  This Socratic Seminar was intended as sort of an introductory discussion regarding the extent to which language effects personal knowledge, communication, and public knowledge. 3 teams independently developed and explained the following issues:

1. An interesting connection between Ethics and Language in regards to consistency: It would seem that language would have little meaning if everyone used language deceptively (said one thing, but did another, false beliefs, etc.).  We will expand on this later.
2. We tried to define Language (albeit with difficulty) as something to do with the interaction between symbols representing things, actions, or descriptions (English-ese: Nouns, Verbs, Adjectives). Also a conversation of Math as an objective language was discussed.
3. The development of language starts as a desire to connect with one another, were it not for this desire (rooted in what way of knowing? Reason? Emotion?), we would not have the complexity of language we do today.
4. The progression of language over time as it relates to the Arts reveals features originating in abstraction (Prehistoric Art), entering a height of complexity (Renaissance, humanism, Modernism), then returning to new forms of abstraction (Post-Modernism).

Excellent Discussions.  It really helps me narrow the scope when discussing language issues.  Many of the topics discussed above would not have been brought to my attention if it wasn't for this hardworking group of students.

Next week: Research methods and TOK Assessment discussion.

Sem. 2. Week 1: Review and Assignments

The first week back we clarified our various views on Charlie’s developmental stages in Flowers for Algernon. We discussed how Language (AoK) is the main vehicle for knowing Charlie’s mind.  We also analyzed how Language, specifically fiction, is used to discuss important truths concerning Knowledge issues and acquisition (Charlie is, after all, only a character developed by an author for a specific purpose).  

We completed the following activities connected to our Summer readings:

1. Two Coffee Discussions related to Flowers For Algernon: Developmental Stages and Themes.

2. Discussion of how false beliefs from our childhood exist, and our feelings associated with them.

3. Rorschach testing acdtivity history, and analysis

4. Inception Maze Activity (2 minutes to build a maze that takes longer than one minute to finish).  IT WAS HARDER THAN WE EXPECTED. Repeat experiment in the future.

Next Week: (8/19/13) Assignments:

1. Coffee Discussion: Choice Novel Reading review
2. Socratic Seminar 3: Language as Greatest AOK? Worksheet and Collaboration (Due: 8/23/13)
3. 2 Surrealist Language Games (FUN!)
4. Introduction to Literature Circles and Research Methods

Weeks 18-19 Review and Assignments

If you were in class on 6/3/13, you should have received a tentative final grade check.  Many of you noted discrepancies due to the precarious nature of Dropbox as we build a paperless classroom, as well as a backlog of late assignments.  These issues are being addressed, and your grade will accurately reflect your performance in the class by 6/7/13.

PLEASE make sure that you submit any missing assignments via email this week (even if you have already submitted via Dropbox)  The immediacy of the student contact will allow me to fast track your assignments in the grade book as opposed to locating them in previous weeks folders.

This week we looked at our final topic: The Arts as Knowing.  Due to the scope of the Arts, our initial discussion focused exclusively on the visual fine arts, such as painting and photography.

Our three main ideas include:

1. Art is a way in which humans seek knowledge from the senses; ultimately becoming indistinguishable from one’s own mental reality.

2. Art is a scientific process and a crafted technology; one that often results in academies, schools of thought/criticism, and cycles of Avant Garde.

3. Art often communicates historical, ethical, iconographic, religious, and thematic representations of “the human condition”, often summarized in the question “what is beautiful?”

We completed the following activities in order to reinforce the main ideas of the unit:

1. We contemplated the problem of knowledge: To what extent do humans participate in Art as both an introspective, as well as communicative, process?

2. We looked at several simple shape illusion as a crossover to the Human Sciences (Gestalt Theory), as well as our ability to be "tricked" by our senses as a way to make meaningful/pragmatic patterns for high functionality.

3.  We watched Derron Brown's experiment in "Change Blindness" and discussed how our level of observation is different in the mundane tasks of everyday life and the "sacred" nature of Art.


4. We entered Plato's "Cave" with a drawing activity under our desks.  We then attempted to learn from one another what was important from the drawings, noting challenges in interpreting other people's symbolic awareness.

5. We looked at two paintings (one by Bosch, the other by Hitler) to determine if artistic style and subject matter can illuminate hidden psychological meaning and/or ethical character traits.





6. We observed controversial images and their ability to shape our understanding and emotions of the world.  We argued whether an image (such as the "Picture of the Year" recipient from the recent Palestinian bombings) can convey an authentic, historical, and emotional meaning despite heavy editing.


We also discussed the summer assignment.  Please read over the information carefully and email me with any questions.

Assignments are in the Dropbox folder.

Weeks 15-17 Review and Assignments

With finals fast approaching, I have fallen behind on the review assignment blogs the last two weeks. I apologize.

 For Unit 12 (weeks 16 and 17), we had three basic ideas we were discussing and learning:

 1.The “Human Sciences” is a framework of knowing, categorizing, and analyzing human behavior towards prediction and possible prevention/correction 

2. The “Human Sciences” is a collection of loosely related branches of evolving thought throughout history. Today, the paradigms correspond to Behaviorialism vs. Gestalt, Naturalism vs Interpretivism. And Qualitative vs. quantative research. 

3. The “Human Sciences” have several AoK crossovers, including ethics, nature vs. nurture, and the ongoing pursuit of “truth” and/or “fact”. 

We completed the following 7 activities (2 weeks) to reinforce these ideas:

1. We considered the difference between motives in "a man drinks a glass of wine" and "a deer drinks from a river". We noted the possible similarities and the massive differences associated with both actions. WE concluded that, whatever else being equal, when studying humans we both understand (being a part of the species), and recognize, a vast behavioral complexity due to the advanced cognitive functioning of the human brain (as well as any metaphysical, environmental factors involved). We extract, analyze, symbolize, and deconstruct events in a way that is lacking in other species.

 2. We watched a clip from "Deal or No Deal", in which the participate "reasoned" towards a massive reward loss.
 We identified the various players in the "society" of the stage (the contestant, his wife, his mother, his friends, the audience, the host, the "banker", and even the beautiful women holding the briefcases). We discussed the seemingly infinite nuance involved in the process, leading ultimately to the irrational risk-taking. A problem of knowledge emerges: To what extent does external factors contribute to our behaviors, especially with regards to the positive and negative consequences of high-stakes risk taking behavior?

 3. We read descriptions of human rituals/events in which "human science" language was conspicuously absent. We noted why the language of the Human Sciences is important in our ability to fully understand the meaning behind human behavior (as opposed to the mere reliance on Natural Science terminology).

 4. We watched a clip from "Silence of the Lambs" and discussed the body language, tonality, theatrical crossover (since the actors are creating fictional characters), and the interplay of "good" and "bad" Human Science application.




 5. We experimented with the "McGurk Effect" to introduce the tension between causation and correlation in research.

 6. We briefly discussed controversial topics such as suicide, LRA and child army, as an introduction to quantative and qualitive research.



 7. Lastly, we discussed the paradigms of the naturalist and interpretivist positions, focusing on the effects of the environment on behavior (Pavlov, Milgrim, etc.) Leading to the problem of knowledge question: Is all our behaviors dictated by society, our genes, or by metaphysical substances such as free will?

 Assignments are in the Drop box folder (due by 6/6/13)

05.22.13 Human Sciences: Behavioralism and Milgrim Experiment

05.20.13 Human Sciences: Class Discussion and Taste Test

05.07.13 Conclusion to Natural Sciences: Science and Religion

TOK Questions in Iron Man 3!

See if you can spot the TOK topics in this comic review from Wired Magazine

Week 14: Review and Assignments

This week we finished looking at our 3 ideas about Natural Science:

1. Scientific knowing is an evolving system that limits uncertainty through observation, experimentation, and inductive/deductive reasoning.
2. Science as a language, ethos, and community reveals innate features of human identity and processing.
3. Scientific objectivity and cultural diversity, particularly religious knowing, are often at odds for various reasons. Why?

Activities in Class:

1. We focused predominantly on idea 2 regarding Science as a collection of communal thought rooted in trust of social contract, ethics, and the shared goals and purpose of science.

2. We grappled with 4 scenarios in which students described solutions and approaches from a scientific perspective.  While our natural tendency is to think that Science offers no solutions in the realm of Ethics (having to code switch to a new area of knowledge to develop solutions), I posit that the fundamental nature of Science is not an arbitrary collection of data and observation, but a meaningful pursuit of knowledge that seeks the betterment of humankind through practical methodology.

3. We continued our analysis of Pseudo-

Science, discussing the devastating implications of politically strong counter-scientific programs, such as Matthias Rath and HIV "vitamin therapy" in Africa (around 171,000 new HIV infections and 343,000 deaths could have been prevented between 1999 and 2007).

4. Lastly, We briefly discussed your next Socratic Seminar on the topic "Science and Religion".  Your team must work through the model of argument-building, reflecting on your own understanding of TOK topics, and design a PoK question related to this topic to research and discuss. Be ready to use actual sources to defend claims in your seminar.  Prepare a real conversation from your thesis and make sure everyone in your team is able to contribute a new thought to the argument/observation.

Our Socratic Seminar will be Wednesday, May 8th, 2013.

Have a good weekend!  We will meet again Monday, April 29th to finish Natural Science (idea 3, and controversial topics like evolution) and research for the Socratic Seminar.

Science, Religion Incompatible? Take the Poll and Read the Views

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/03/07/science-religion-incompatible_n_1327263.html

14. Natural Sciences Week 2: Discussion of Chapter notes and Science and Religion Introduction

13. Natural Sciences 4/17/13 Class

Week 13: Natural Sciences Weekly Review and Assignments

This week we introduced the Natural Science Area of Knowing.  Our conversation centered around 3 central ideas for the week:

1. Scientific knowing is an evolving system that limits uncertainty through observation, experimentation, and inductive/deductive reasoning.
2. Science as a language, ethos, and community reveals innate features of human identity and processing.
3. Scientific objectivity and cultural diversity, particularly religious knowing, are often at odds for various reasons. Why?

We have explored the first 2 central ideas, and will continue with 2 and start 3 next week.

Here is a brief recap of our activities:

Monday 4/15/13
1. We watched the symphony of science music video and discussed some of the creative use of language in expressing the excitement and aesthetic of Scientific knowing over and against its often emotionless caricature.


 2. We questioned why it is that modern scientific knowing is lacking despite our incessant dependence on it. (We watched some juggalo questioning strategies to reinforce the point).
3. We considered the constantly changing disciplines and sub-disciplines of Science, and considered its similarity to the TOK Knower Profile.
4. We looked at how new paradigms clarify old ones, not destroy them. This establishes an important continuity in Scientific Knowing. 

5. We analyzed the ways in which the Scientific Method is produced and how it operates.


Wednesday 4/17/13

6. We questioned our own assumptions about the nature of observation in experimentation by recreating the double slit experiment.
7. We considered the language and syntax behind "Hypothesizing" over and against "prediction" and "guessing" by using an excerpt from Hawking's A Brief History of Time. 
8. We discussed the last experiment we did in our respective Biology and Chemistry classes , analyzing the methodologies and goals of our pursuit of knowledge academically.  We shared our personal experiences with poorly modeled experiments which often limit our understanding of science to "discovering definitions".

9. We looked at a list of "happy accidents" in Science with the expectation of a Monday discussion from your findings.
10. Lastly, we got out of our seats for some nice bull@)*% science using "Brain Gym" stretches to "massage our Carotid artery to increase oxidizing of the blood" while treating autism/ADHD with knee stretches and ear pulls.  We then looked at a quick quiz of "Yes or B.S" popular scientific statements (analyzing for both phrasing, content, and fallacy).

Your assignment for the week:

TOK Readings:

1.       153-157

2.       158-164

3.       165-170

4.       171-176

5.       177-182

6.       183-189

AIO: Evolution

7.       PP: Charles Darwin or Copernicus

8.       Special audio notes on:

a.       Intelligence Squared Debate:  “Science Refutes God"

b.      Ted Talk: Ben Goldacre, “Bad Science”

9.       Guided, in-class note assignments (need these for Monday’s reading discussion)

a.       Definition of Science

b.      List 10 sub-disciplines of science

c.       Research a moment of “science serendipity”

d.      Find an example of “bad science”

Intelligence Squared Debate Motion: "Science Refutes God"

TED Talk, Ben Goldacre: "Bad Science"

04/08/13 12. Mathematics, Week 2, Statistics, Bias, and Risk Behavior

6. Mathematics

The video lecture is incomplete this week due to exceeded space on my iPad (Sorry!).  Refer to the overview below:

This week we began an introduction into Mathematics as an Area of Knowing.

5 simple objectives:

1. Math as "future knowing"?
2. Math as History of Thought.
3. Math as a challenge of certainty.
4. Math as a Process
5. Math as Cultural Purpose


Summary of Lecture.  Students completed the following:

1. A magic trick connected to the perceived certainty of mathematical theorems.  All our numbers, no matter the choice, converged into a single result.  We compared this type of "future knowing" with the study of probability, using Nate Silver as a contemporary example.

2. We compared the philosophy of mathematics from Newton, Leibnitz, and Kant, asking the question "how might math give us knowledge of the "thing in itself" beyond normal empirical observation?" Kant believed that Math was, in fact, a logical and synthetic (both rational, and really in the world) type of knowledge.

3. We challenged the assertions with a brief discussion of special relativity.  Einstein change the "certainty" of mathematics by proving the existence of time and space as contingent on perspective, gravity and relative space between objects.

4. We looked at how various theorems (a set of axioms creating a formula about the world) can be proven by coherence, exhaustion (computer programs, probability, etc.). While no theorem can be philosophically certain, we described how Math attains a higher level of consistency than other areas of knowing.

5.  Lastly, we very briefly talked about the purpose of math.  We looked at mathematical proofs, learning, and utility across three cultures.  How might this be related to the objectivity of math considering the different needs of society?

Next week, we will discuss your readings and argue it out topic (climate change), as well as have a little fun and competition using mathematical probability and the Monty Hall problem.  We will also continue our question of math's discovery vs. creation by contemplating its use as a principle of Art and Music.

I found this excellent 1 minute recap of special relativity for those who need clarification:

04/01/13 11. Mathematics as Predictions of Knowing and History

3/20/13 Week 10: TOK Writing 1 and Outline Discussion

Week 9 Overview and Assignments

Week 9 was an overview of historical revisionism, Socratic questioning, methodology of research, and clarifications of the Extended Essay from a TOK perspective.  We spent time in the computer lab getting acquainted with Ebscohost.  It is important that you begin saving articles to an Extended Essay folder.  Consider what types of evidence are appropriate for your topic.

Week 10 is about assessment.  On Wednesday, you will have an exam from the ideas presented the last 8 weeks.  You need to review your notes.  This exam will be an online, timed test.

 Also on Wednesday, you will be required to have a rough draft of your paper, as well as your outline finished.  We will be sharing our topics, as well as the beginning of our ideas, together in discussion. 

The goal of this TOK paper is to help students:

1.       Prepare for their extended essay 4/17 deadline by requiring a furthering of thought on this important assessment.

2.       Teach research methods and become familiar to the routines and effecient workflow (invaluable to college readiness).

3.       Review TOK terminology and concepts while applying them to a student-generated topic.

4.       Developing prior knowledge and a foundation towards the future TOK assessments, including essay and presentation.

Make sure you are using the dissertation outline to develop your research question (more specific than your Extended Essay “Topic”:  see week 9 video lecture and ppt for further information).  Complete the page requirements, the MLA citations, and the TOK crossover to receive full points.

PLEASE EMAIL ME IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.  I know not all of you can be in class due to sports. I am very accommodating.

3/13/13 Week 9: Breaking Down the Research Question

Week 9: Historical Method 2: Socratic Seminar

TCHS TOK Video Lecture 3/6/13: Historiography, Borders, Identity

Week 8 Overview and Assignments

In week 8 Monday (3/4), we discussed Chapter 12 jigsaw readings on Historical Method.  We pressed one another to explain the sections of the chapter in ways that went beyond “fact mining”.  In the future, you should begin to focus your chapter reading presentations each week with the following questions:

1. Give a brief overview of your section with reference to page numbers.
2. Decide on the 5 specific and important TOK observations from your section.  Avoid menial facts.
3.   Develop a Problem of Knowledge question from your section.
4.     Is it something you would want to research in the future?  Does it affect your extended essay or TOK assessment focus? How?

From our discussion, there were the pertinent summary ideas, as well as some Problems of Knowledge from chapter 12:

1.  The debate on histiography is a CURRENT one involving a continual evaluation of historical claims through a scientific, political, religious, and cultural perspectives, often with major discrepancy.
2. Citing various examples (such as the Japanese textbook controversy and the Palestinian-Israeli conflict), chapter 12 highlights some of the important perspectives in current discussion of history, as well as its synthesis with other areas of knowing such as ethics and language.
3. Chapter 12 divides the information into sections interacting with the ways of knowing, identifying important questions concerning facts v. context (sense perception), imaginative framework for meaningful historical dialogue (emotion), logical framework that reduces error and creates coherence and validity (reason) and various sources/schools of thought associated with historical narrative development (language). 
4. Lastly, Ch. 12 identifies various methodologies for describing the historical process, including Kuhn’s cycle of paradigm shifts (will return in Ch. 10).  It is this emphasis on historical revision which is the focus of your second formal Socratic Seminar (3/11).  Regarding the historian, ch. 12 takes methodologies and applies it to the portraits of the learners inside the specific scheme; ultimately contrasting the wise and compassionate (Buddhist), the Just and the Loyal (judeo-christian-islamic), the gentlemen scholar (confucius) and balanced rationalism (Greece/Enlightenment).

On Week 8 Wednesday (3/6), I modeled a discussion of one of the TOK question you will be answering for the Socratic Seminar.  My emphasis was on the nature of borders in relation to cultural clashes, identity, emotional impact, and historical development.  My examples included:

1. The development of Alcatraz and its transitory symbolic presence from a dark island to the strength of the Federal Justice system, to a protest site for Native American solidarity, to finally a museum.
2.  The first and second crusades as a clash of religious, political, and economic ideology between the English, French, Byzantines, Jews, and the various Muslim kingdoms through the East.  Each has a distinct view of the event, and the reliability of the accounts is challenged by the bias and distance  in our earliest record.
3.  The current Palestinian-israeli conflict in terms of border changes, perspectives on just war and ownership of land, statistics on ratio of causalities, and a picture focusing on the emotional impact of human loss towards an argument for “Sustainable History”.
4. The controversy surrounding Homo Floresiensis and the competing models of early human history (research “Out-of-Africa” theory vs. the “Multi-regional” theory), offering up perspectives on the borders between species (as opposed to simply divisions of land).

Your homework for Week 8:

1. Complete the “Historical Method 2: Socratic Seminar Research Week” document in your managebac messages (linked above).
2. As part of your packet, choose with your team (completed in class today), one of the three TOK questions to answer:
1. Citing specific examples, analyze the quote: “History tells us more about the person who wrote it than about the people being written about” .  Reference at least two areas of knowing and two ways of knowing.
2. How does one’s historical “lens” into the past affect both the educational use, and the political use, of history in the present?
3. What teleology, if any, exists in the potential patterns of history?  Reference two areas of knowing.
3. Choose a specific example (use your blog topics as reference) to research as part of your discussion.  Include TOK vocabulary explained in this week’s document.

Lastly, I have messaged you the template for the Extended Essay.  The hard deadline for your current work (including the lit review, advisor meeting, formal proposal, and outline) is 4/17/13.

Week 7 Overview and Assignments

This week our goal is to consider the progressive nature of historiography throughout time.

 We completed an activity on historical reliability and transmission of information, considering how personal perceptions and our interactions with various ways and areas of knowing affected the ways in which our historical information was relayed.

 We also discussed some of the underlying principles of historical observation using Jorgenson's rationalist 7-step model on the limits and reliability of history based on time, space, motivation, and quantity.

 On Wednesday  we considered the development of history throughout time, starting with the Greco-Roman traditions, swerving into the non-western developments of China and Muslim cultures, contrasted with the Early Christian and Judeo-Palestinian conceptions of time, into the Enlightenment Whip school, Hegelianism, Annales school and lastly, Marxism. I suggested for the ongoing, 21st century discussion of the philosophy of history and its impact on the present/future to research the system of thought known as "Sustainable History", which sees all human culture as a single entity comprised of many parts.

Assignments:

TOK Ch. 6, p. 211-236

Team 1: 211-215

Team 2: 216-220

Team 3: 221-225

Team 4: 226-230

Team 5: 231-233

Team 6: 233-236

PP: Team 1-3: Georg Hegel

Team 4-6: Michel Foucault

AIO: Just War Theory

Blog 5 Discussion Here (Due 3/4)
Next week we will be debriefing with an informal Socratic Seminar.  We will also begin preparation for our second formal Socratic Seminar as you begin researching one of three Problem of Knowledge issues regarding History and one other area of knowing.

Week 7: Historical Method

07. historical method from Justin Morris

05. forming ethical questions from Justin Morris

Week 5 Overview and Assignments

Hello, IB ethicists!

This week we discussed the chapters from week 4 regarding ethical reasoning.  We made some headway on the issue of reason and emotion as it relates to our ideas of ethical decision-making, and how the areas of Science and Language interact with it.  Should innovation in science be constrained by Ethical decisions, or is it an impediment to true knowing?  What is the purpose of Science if NOT for the sake of better humanity (an ethically reasoned presupposition to Science).  Excellent thoughts all around.

We also discussed some contemporary issues of Ethical reasoning, including Mansanto's intellectual copyrighting of organisms, drone strikes and the potential causalities and constitutionality issues,  human development and human value in connection with rights to life versus rights to choice/freedom.  We covered a broad range of topics to expose students to the various interactions of Ethics in current global issues.  This will aid you in the development of our first formal Socratic Seminar next Thursday.

On Thursday, 2/14, we will be meeting briefly in my classroom and then turning you loose in the library to do research on your topics.  You received a packet that should help walk you through the development of an authentic Problem of Knowledge that is tailored to your own personal interests and current, yet still evolving, positions as genuine Knowers from what we have studied the past four weeks.

Make sure you come prepared Thursday, 2/21 with all of your notes, question, toulmin model of argument, and with a strong handle of rhetorical fallacy for use and discussion.  Our goal is to keep the conversation moving, keeping in mind the respect we have for one another as thinkers, and with an eye towards learning, not just teaching.

Week 4 Overview and Assignments

This week we begin looking at the foundations of Ethical Reasoning. While ethical questions may come natural to us when thinking about controversial topics (i.e. is x right or wrong?), the epistemology of ethics has depth and categorical breadth deserving of our attention and practice.

 On Tuesday, we mentioned the disaster of Primavera Island, and the resulting ethical dilemma associated with a scarcity of resources coupled with preconceived notions of utility v. innate value. Most teams chose the route of pure, arbitrary chance, and rationalized this ethical decision as "blindness leads to fairness". Some teams began rationalizing in order to avoid the ethical decision (does the baby count as a passenger due to weight? etc.). One team couldn't select more than 5 "useful" people, and would thus have some extra leg room. What separates these ethical decisions from one another? Can we make some progress on this notion of Ethics with thoughtfulness despite societal complexity? Is there meaning to "right" and "wrong" action?


 On Wednesday, we discussed the competing theories of ethics. Utilitarian Ethics suggests a focus on end results towards a maximum happiness. Deontological Ethics suggests a focus upon the virtue of an ethical choice in terms of its innate rationality above its ultimate consequence. We offered examples of both that were sometimes palatable and sometimes difficult in order to recognize the debate may not be simplistic.

On Thursday, we developed a Socratic Seminar on the topic of Discriminiation.  The concepts included 1. How subcultures are formed 2. How complexities of culture are simplified to emphasize differences 3. How discrimination may lead to solidarity and new worldview formations. and 4. The interaction of nature with discrimination practices.


Assignments:

TOK Chs. 7-8, p. 237-257

Team 1: 237-241

Team 2: 242-246

Team 3: 246-251

Team 4: 251-257

Team 5: Case Study 1

Team 6: Case Study 2

Philosopher Portrait: Mill or Kant

Argue it Out: Gene Modification

4. Ethical Reasoning

Week 3 Overview and Assignments

Last week we completed our discussion of formal and informal fallacies, analyzing through political discussion both the usefulness (emotional appeal) and the defense against fallacious reasoning. We offered several different problems of knowledge associated with media bias (focusing on theory of truth over ethical reasoning).

Our argue it out for week 3 was associated with discrimination. So often fallacious reasoning is associated with the development of in/out groups and "othering". The interaction of practical topics with a Theory of Knowledge lens is the goal of this course.

Our Philosopher Portrait was on Socrates. The introduction of the Socratic Method of questioning. Consider how the Socratic Method can be used to interact with topics of discrimination, or the defense against "othering".

Lastly, our reading was a supplemental resource called "Thank you for Arguing", suggesting practical steps in the art of persuasion. This will be discussed more in Week 4 (transitioning to Ethical Reasoning).

3. Intro to Argument and Informal Fallacies

03. intro to argument, informal fallacies from Justin Morris

>

Week 2 Overview and Assignments

This week we looked at formal logical fallacies, and suggested the interaction between language and mathematics as the basis for epistemology. You are currently reading Chapters 7 and 8 on Reason and and the various Areas of Knowledge described in the TOK learner profile. Here is a basic summary of the points from this week:

1. Week 1's discussion of the Ways of Knowing introduction, as well as the "Knower" as comprised of memories (and the limitations therein). I introduced the "Knowledge Prism"

 2. Rational v. Empirical, and Plato's "Justified True Belief" model of knowledge. This will be our working definition, and will be clarified and expanded throughout the course.

 3. Formal Logic is comprised of prepositions that necessitate a particular conclusion. This is developed with a syntax that follows certain prepositional rules called the "Laws of Logic".

4. When those Logical rules are not followed, or the prepositions in a logical syllogism are incorrectly distributed, a fallacy is created.

5. There is a difference between informal and formal fallacies. Informal fallacies have more to do with topical argument and language than with structure and math.

6. Blog activity and discussion: Gun Control. I suggested in our decentralized Socratic Seminar that the problems of knowledge produced during Week 1's argue it out were focused exclusively only one area of knowing (Ethics). I suggested ways to expand the PoK to include other areas and ways of knowing to develop a truly ToK perspective. I am not so much interested in the ethics of Gun Control, but the theories of knowing behind the Gun Control debate, and the various factors involved.



 This week's Assignment:

TOK Chs. 7-8, p. 94-132

Team 1: 94-100
Team 2: 101-106
Team 3: 107-113
Team 4: 114-120
Team 5: 121-127
Team 6: 128-132


Argue it Out: Media Bias
 Philosopher Portrait: Rene Descarte
 Blog 2b: Identifying Formal and Informal Fallacies in Political Dialogue.

2b. New Blog: Fallacies in Political Rhetoric

TC TOK Forum

2. logic and epistemology, chs. 7, 8, p. 94-132

2. logic and epistemology, chs. 7 8, p. 94-132 from Justin Morris

1b. Definition of Knowledge

Week 1 Overview and Weekend Assignments

Excellent conversation. Look into the difference between "Subjective" and "Objective" truth claims. Also, consider our student-generated question: can there be knowledge without truth?"

A couple of assignment points:

1. You are blogging on the "Alatheia Forum" (http://www.tctok.us/p/alatheia-forum.html), posting your PoK questions on Violence, Identity and Culture (as well as one paragraph response to another TOK student PoK).

2. You are completing your team chapter readings with one page of outlined notes. Be ready to debrief on the topics and activities to explain the concepts to the class and points you found important/interesting.

3. You are completing an "Argue Out" on the topic: "Gun Control" (Also in the notes file here: https://www.dropbox.com/s/guxgfxlccqlvbm5/01.last. first.date.Notes.docx)further explanation of this assignment can befoundhere:https://www.dropbox.com/s/ti5x3dh93gti2yf/Argue%20Out%20Explanation.doc

4. You are submitting your Winter Assignment to the "Winter Assignment" Folder properly formatted (according to the name file "00.last.first.ID.date.winter").

Sorry about the buggy computer and/or typos today. Loftus and Palmer might beat me up for falsifying their experiment with my shoddy scientific integrity.

Here is a recording of the last part of the period (when I got my iPhone back from picture taking). http://www.evernote.com/shard/s109/sh/f9d172e1-e59a-4b26-92d1-0e6a880fd1e4/3abfe81bf26189a32cbbe7147 6976134

Thanks! Have a great Weekend!

1. Introduction to TOK, ch. 1-3 p. 1-41

Schedule of Classes, Week 1, 1/14

Hello Class,

Just as a reminder you should be close to completing your paper analyzing "Plato and the Platypus" using the prompt and suggested outline. If you are unsure if you are completing something correctly, we will have time in class to discuss clarifications and improvements. You are required to submit an essay this coming Monday, so do your best. Do not leave a section blank. Part of my goal is to assess your writing and understanding of knowledge issues prior to class. You will most certainly improve over the course of the year.

We will be meeting Mondays and Wednesdays. Mondays will be after school at 2:30 to 4:00 and Wednesdays at 1:30-3:00.


This may not accommodate everyone's after school commitments, but it is the only way to fulfill the hourly requirements in an after-school environment with my obligations and those of the majority of the class. Please email me if there is a significant conflict. It is suggested that you contact your coach and discuss the situation with him/her to see if a compromise can be reached should a sport conflict occur. We all need to be flexible.


Lastly, my goal for the course is to be completely paperless. All assignments will be completed via office suite on the iPad or PC. Projects and weekly assignments will be uploaded via managebac's dropbox and turnitin features. It is a requirement to create a personal dropbox account. If you do not already have a personal dropbox account, please click on the following link: http://db.tt/QmcxC9oU This will not only give you an account, it will add space to my own account. :) We will have time to smooth out all these features and more next week. Do not worry. Enjoy the rest of your vacation.