Search Header Logo

TOK Unit 4 Quiz 1

Authored by David Whitsed

Philosophy

11th Grade

TOK Unit 4 Quiz 1
AI

AI Actions

Add similar questions

Adjust reading levels

Convert to real-world scenario

Translate activity

More...

    Content View

    Student View

10 questions

Show all answers

1.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

Naïve theories are the result of:

Systematic research
Personal experiences
Biases in decision-making
Lack of education

2.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

The problem of telling the difference between science and non-science is known as:

Pseudo-science
Verification
Demarcation
Falsifiability

3.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

The logical fallacy “affirming the consequent” is reasoning of the following form: (1) If p then q; (2) q; (3) Hence, p. This fallacy is characteristic of the following demarcation criterion:

Falsification
Verification
Consensus
Coherence

4.

MULTIPLE CHOICE QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

According to Karl Popper, the defining characteristic of scientific knowledge is its:

Falsifiability
Progress
Confirmation bias
Empirical support

5.

OPEN ENDED QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

According to Thomas Kuhn, scientific progress is defined by the ability of new theories to solve more …. that old theories were not able to solve.

Evaluate responses using AI:

OFF

6.

MULTIPLE SELECT QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

Which of these problems suggest that falsifiability cannot be used as the only scientific principle (tick all that apply)?

Theory-laden facts (every observable fact already contains an element of theory in it)
Confirmation bias (scientists have a tendency to look for supporting evidence and downplay contradicting evidence)
Underdetermination of theory by evidence (usually more than one theory fits the available data equally well)
Insufficiency of evidence (supporting evidence can be found even for the most absurd beliefs)

7.

MULTIPLE SELECT QUESTION

30 sec • 1 pt

The idea that observational facts are inevitably theory-laden suggests that (tick all that apply):

Observation alone cannot be used to support or refute a theory
In addition to empirical evidence, there must be some other criterion of choosing between rival theories
Observation based on a false theory may end up refuting a true theory
If a theory is inconsistent with facts, it is not necessarily false

Access all questions and much more by creating a free account

Create resources

Host any resource

Get auto-graded reports

Google

Continue with Google

Email

Continue with Email

Classlink

Continue with Classlink

Clever

Continue with Clever

or continue with

Microsoft

Microsoft

Apple

Apple

Others

Others

Already have an account?