That whales have vestigial pelvis bones presents those producing Religious Knowledge with specific problems.
Remember: AoK Religious Knowledge Systems “offer answers to fundamental questions about the meaning and purpose of human life” (ToK Study guide, 2014, pg 46).
Are the vestigial structures of Cetaceans a practicable and plausible object for explanation using a Religious Knowledge Framework ?
What are the potential knowledge problems which may arise if we were to apply Methodology of knowledge production of AoK Religious Knowledge Systems to Evolutionary Processes ? (for hints see the end of this article).
How could Religious Knowledge producers seek to overcome each of these Religious Knowledge problems arising from studying evolution ?
Is AoK Religious Knowledge Systems a ‘good’ AoK to use to investigate why Whales have Pelvis Bones ?
Hints for Religious Knowledge Methodological Problems (in no way inclusive nor exhaustive):
Can we apply the use of Reason to authority based inherited knowledge ?
What is the role of evidence when considering faith based knowledge ?
What are the implications for RKS if we conclude that Cetaceans once had (or still have) parity, or even superiority, in relation humans ?
Is it a problem if we accept that external reality may change whilst the internal reality of Faith based knowledge remains fixed and static ?
Is there a danger of tautological interpretation of modern phenomena.
That whales have vestigial pelvis bones presents Natural Sciences with specific problems.
Remember: AoK Natural Science is “based on observation and constructed using reason and imagination“. (ToK Study guide, 2014, pg 36).
Are the vestigial structures of cetaceans a practicable and plausible object of study for The Natural Sciences ?
Are the historical records of the development of Evolutionary Theory a practicable and plausible object of study for Natural Sciences ?
What are the potential knowledge problems which may arise if we were to apply The Scientific Method (The Hypothetico-Deductive Method) to Evolutionary Processes ? (for hints see the end of this article).
How could Natural Scientists seek to overcome each of these Scientific Knowledge Problems ?
Are AoK Natural Sciences a ‘good’ AoK to use to investigate why Whales have Pelvis Bones ?
Hints for Natural Scientific Methodological Problems (in no way inclusive nor exhaustive):
Is there a well distributed, representative sample of data from which to identify patterns ?
Is it a problem of reliability, or validity, that we are using the same instrument to analyse itself (the brain analysing the brain) ?
Is it possible to do well controlled reliable experiments ?
What is the direction of Cause and Effect ?
Is there a danger of tautological interpretation of modern phenomena ?
That whales have vestigial pelvis bones presents the Historian with specific problems.
Remember: AoK History is the study of the recorded past (ToK Study guide, 2014, pg 40).
Are the vestigial structures of cetaceans a practicable and plausible object of study for a Historian ?
Are the historical records of the development of Evolutionary Theory a practicable and plausible object of study for a Historian ?
What are the potential knowledge problems which may arise if we were to apply Historiological Methodology to Evolutionary Processes ? (for hints see the end of this article).
How could Historians seek to overcome each of these Historiological Knowledg Problems ?
Is AoK History a ‘good’ AoK to use to investigate why Whales have Pelvis Bones ?
Hints for Historiological Methodological Problems (in no way inclusive nor exhaustive):
Lack of human recorded evidence.
Theory of action is produced by the product of the action (using the brain to explain the brain).
Must treat natural world as documentary evidence.
Direction of Cause and Effect.
Danger of tautological interpretation of modern phenomena.