Vincent Vargas

TOK Exhibition

The prompt I have chosen is “Are some types of knowledge less open to interpretation than others?” I chose this prompt because I like the questions it imposes in relation to art and how people can interpret it. This prompt may impose a challenge as some may disagree about what things are open to interpretation or not, however that statement is an interpretation itself. This prompt questions whether or not objectivity exists in any form of knowledge, and it mainly explores the artistic aspect of knowledge. 

Object One: Ron Larson Precalculus Book

The first object I chose is a math textbook. Math textbooks serve to spread knowledge about any mathematical concept. They act as a guide to whoever is reading it, and provide them with mathematical knowledge. Math textbooks are important because they provide us with important information, especially if someone wants to go into a field involving mathematics. I chose this object because I believe that it provides an important point regarding the prompt. When learning about math, there is not much room for interpretation, as everyone reading the book is learning and thinking about the same key concepts. The creators of this textbook had a clear focus and intent with the knowledge that they were providing, they did not intend for the knowledge this book contains to be interpreted in any other way. Even though some may understand the book better than others, the book is still teaching the same exact lessons and providing the same exact knowledge to everyone reading it, therefore it is less open to interpretation than something like a painting. However, one could argue that if different people understand the textbook in different ways, such as using a different way of thinking to solve some of the equations, then the knowledge the book provides is open to interpretation, but I feel that this is very limited in a way. The text on the paper is very defined, whic would mean that the type of knowledge this book provides could be seen as objective, as it is entirely fact based. 

Object Two: “The Son of Man”

The second object I chose is a painting. The painting simply depicts a man standing up, with an apple in front of his face and a brick wall behind him. This painting was painted in 1946 by Rene Margritt. I chose this object because I believe it is a good representation that the knowledge an object proivdes may not be clear and thus open to interpretation. This object highlights the fact that sometimes knowledge is not explicitly given to us, and rather the knowledge an object provides is left up to interpretation. The knowledge that this painting provides, for example, is completely ambiguous. One person may look at this painting and think it is dumb, while another may look at it and see it as a genius message about the world. There is no objectivity when it comes to this painting. When comparing this painting to something like blueprints to a house, it is clear that the painting is much more open to interpretation. However, someone could make the argument that there is objective truth in this artwork if Rene Margritt created it to convey a certain message. Still, if the viewer develops their own understanding of the work, then it is therefore open to interpretation. 

Object Three: Tyler the Creator - Wolf (Vinyl Record)

The third object I chose is an album by Tyler the Creator titled Wolf. This is a hip hop record created in 2013 that is over an hour in length. I chose this object because I believe this serves as a sort of middle ground when it comes to how knowledge can be interpreted. This album features songs that may have a deeper meaning to them when you pay attention, and the album as a whole follows a subtle story that not everyone may pick up on. One person may listen to this album just to listen to how it sounds, and not delve deeper into it, and another person may try to follow the story it tells and follow the meaning of some of the songs on it. These two types of people interpret the knowledge this album provides in different ways. These are fundamentally two different types of knowledge, as one person knows more about the album than the other. According to this, we can say that the way someone interprets something can be seen as different types of knowledge. Even though there is an objective story within the album, if someone doesn’t pay attention to it they are still gaining some type of knowledge from the album, and they would be interpreting it differently. 

In conclusion, some knowledge is indeed less open to interpretation than others. When looking at something like a math textbook, one could argue that it is less open to interpretation than a painting, as the contents of a math textbook are clearly defined and the author of it has a clear purpose and intention with how the reader is supposed to interpret it. Meanwhile a painting is not something that is clearly defined and the way someone is supposed to view it is completely objective. With that being said, someone could argue that no type of knowledge is more open to interpretation than another type of knowledge, but if we look at things objectively, it is clear that a textbook is more open to interpretation than a painting.