Knowledge vs Wisdom

The two words-knowledge and wisdom, may at first seem the same but as it turns out are not. I find that knowledge is just a piece of information, an experience or a fact that we have absorbed at some point in our life that will stay hidden somewhere in the depths of our brain until it's needed. But wisdom is knowing what to do with that knowledge and also a perspective we form throughout our lives.
This can be expressed in a simple quote that we might experience in our every day lives:

And also:

As these two quotes show us again then knowledge is something we learn and wisdom something we absorb using the knowledge, but this raises a question. When trying to define a fact then to what extenct can we define knowledge and at what point starts wisdom? Where can we draw the line?
When searching the internet to find the anwser to the difference between knowledge and wisdom we might encounter many similar but at the same time very different anwsers. For example one definition might say

"Knowledge is obtained, Wisdom is developed" 

and the others  might say

"Wisdom is ability to judge"

"Knowledge is what you know and wisdom is what to know"

At first glance they all seem similar but as we can see the wording and the approach is different. That shows us that people define knowledge and wisdom differently, but based on that we can ask if the explanation of the difference between knowldege and wisdom is different, can we really have a similar understanding of it and how can we be sure that everyones perspective towards the aspect is the same?

Studying human behaviour

In our last TOK class Rohullah and me designed an experiment to a hypothesis that students in our school will demonstrate more juvenile behaviour at lunch time. We found that the best way is to start counting people who make the most noise and who move themselves more actively. For example in the morning we can maybe see only one or two people run around or stand up rather than sit down and sleep. But during the lunch time students have more time to fool around and when they have eaten the chances are that they have more energy.
But this all is just a hypothesis, can we ever be able to truly study human behaviour? I think that everything is very subjective due to the fact that people are different and have different lives. Noone is completely same because they have differents aspects affecting their lives. Also how can we be sure that the researcher defines the human behaviour in their studies correctly. The researcher is also different and may have a different point of view.
One other point that rises in this experiment is the ethical issue. Is it ethical to observe(stalk) people in order to understand their behaviour?
In conclusion I think that there is a certain extent to which we can understand and predict human behaviour, but in most cases it is all subjective and affected by different factors we miht never truly understand. But where is that extent?

Manipulating through emotions

Emotion is one of the strongest powers and feelings a person can have. By that it also makes it one of their biggest weaknesses. When other people find out how to play with your emotions they often use the ability(maipulation) in favour of themselves.

Playing with peoples emotions is not a rare thing in today's society. We experience it every day- advertisments, media, politicians our peers etc. But knowing that we are being manipulated with the whole time how can we distinguish our own thoughts and opinions ?

Politicians are known for playing with peoples emotions in order to gain their trust and favour. When communicating with the public they often use language that makes them look good. I have found the 2004 Obama speech where he in my opinion pressures alot on peoples emotions.

 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OFPwDe22CoY

By saying how it is unlickely that he is there due to the poor conditions he had in his childhood he is making people feel pitty for him. Also by talking about a little boy who can't read and a senior citizen who can't afford their medicine he makes people sad and compassionate, but by saying that he cares about them and will make their conditions better people will now associate him with something good and happy(by imagining that little boy actually getting an education). In his speech he is trying to create a nice and a cozy feeling in people so they everytime they think of him they also remember the feeling. 

Obama is not the only one of politicians to make a speech like this but is just like any other. He is just one of few who actually completed something he promised while as other politicians play the same pity card and don't achieve anything. 

For example in Estonia we have a famous politician called Edgar Savisaar, who indeed played a role in freeing Estonia from the Soviet Union, but who is now very corrupted and money based. He is very loved by older citizens because it had the biggest impact on their lives and they trust him now completely. But younger people can see the new world and know that things are not fine. 

In many of his public speeches he talks about how he is going to offer a good pension for the elderly people and always brings up how he "saved Estonia". This is clearly playing with the emotions and memories of people who can't deside any better anymore.

Thorughout our everyday life we are influenced by those people and in most cases people fall for the manipulation even if they try not to.

This is why I need faith!

I don't consider faith to always be a religious thing as I am not a religious person, so I don't believe in something more powerful than us but I have faith in something AS powerful as us. Meaning ourselves.
 I have faith that something good will happen eventually. I have faith in me when I am writing my TOK essay.
With different opinions of faith then how can we even be certain what faith actually is?

I have always faith in myself. I think if people don't have that little something to keep them going then they are not going to achieve their dreams. If people don't believe in themselves then why do they only believe in something supernatural? That supernatural something can't help you if you don't try fix things or do something yourself. So that is why it is important to believe firstly in yourself.

For example. I have always dreamt big and wanted to achieve the best. I like to follow the term"Reach for the stars" because I find it to be inspirational for me and make me have faith in my actions. I knew that living and learning in Estonia isn't going to help me with my dream, so i believed in myself that I can do it and had faith that someday somehow I will manage to step a bit closer to my dream. I found out that The Regent's School is offering scholarships and saw that as that step. I had faith in myself that I can do that and if I work hard enough I will get a good enough scholarship. And eventually I did.
But can it be generalized? Maybe I am just lucky.

Reach for the stars

Attribution bias

Throughout this week we had to observe our behavior and more specifically observe how much we use a certain bias. I chose to observe my attribution bias, which led to interesting results. I know some cases from my past where I have truly thought that someone is just lucky when they get something and I worked hard if I get something, but I didn't realize that I do it almost every day.

Most common ones were usually to do with school work results.When I got a good score for example in geography then I worked hard for it, but if someone got the same result or even better one, then in my mind they obviously hadn't worked as much for that as I had. And it even made me feel a bit disgusted.

We also had a visit by a university, where a woman shortly introduced us to a few students who study in their school and again I discovered myself of thinking how those people probably just bought themselves in because they were just lucky to be born into a rich family, but if I am going to get into that school then through hard work and effort.
On Friday we had a huge football and volleyball match between the boarders and school staff. I was playing on the volleyball team and gave all that I could. "That was just a lucky hit","She didn't even do anything","I at least tried to do something" and similar thoughts went through my head that evening quite a lot.

Last thought was at The Plonchet Fair we visited this Sunday, where people got to throw 3 balls at cans, and had to knock them over. When they got some cans down then in my mind it was again obviously because of luck because there is no way they had put as much effort in throwing the cans down as I did. 

This all shows us how egoistic our mind is and how evil it may be towards others, but as we try, how can we really know who is actually just lucky and who has  put their heart and soul into the task?

War

Who is the real terrorist?

Recently I saw a very interesting video about war and terrorism.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8jHQkfZT4Qw

In this video a young American university student is having a debate with a fellow Islamic classmate. She claims that Islamic countries are plagued with terrorism. But her teacher brings out and the boy explains the point that USA might be just as much of a terrorist than Islamic countries.

The word "terrorist" derives from the word "terror" as in the person who causes terror. So, how can we measure the amount of terror one country has caused? Who here is to blame?

The most biggest source to search for terrorist right now is exactly as mentioned in the clip, the wars going on in Afghanistan and nearby places. Who there is really to blame for war? Is it the Americans who claim they are there to free people from their awful regime but actually might be there causing terror just for the oil? Or is it the Islams who have caused many bombings killing thousands, but might be doing it just to get the Americans out of their homeland?
How do we know what truly makes a person a terrorist?

I think that as a bystander we seem to agree, with who is the terrorist, with a country we have more in common. But as a person living in one of the fighting countries then of course the terrorist is the one doing harm for us. We never seem to just stop for a second and think of the cause  and aim of one or other attack. We never seem to think that maybe there might just be a problem in us not the country we are fighting with. We don't realize that we might be the terrorist. But then again how can we be completely certain that it is or isn't us?

Terrorists can even be seen in such "simple wars" as civil wars or up-rises. As in people starting a war and terror towards the government because they have been terrorized. Many might say that in this case it is the government that has been unfair and terroristic towards it's people. But considering for example event's going on in Bangkok right now, then I would say the government and the people are terrorizing each other equally. How do we know who here is really to blame in terrorism?Who is the real terrorist

Vase sketch

     On Monday in class we had to draw a picture of a vase our teacher put in the middle of the class. No more instructions were given and the results of pictures were very various.

Here is the picture I sketched.

Since no further instructions weren't given, I decided to use a realistic approach. In this picture I tried to reflect everything as I saw, leaving nothing out. You can see the flowers in the middle of the sketch. I think that although the flowers are in the middle of the picture, they aren't drawn with enough detail and energy to make it look superior.

But realistic approach wasn't what everybody did. The methods varied as well. Most people just drew the vase as a single object and tried to sketch the flowers with as much details as possible, leaving out everything surrounding the vase.

The way I drew the flowers shows that I literally draw what I see, as in seeing is a strong sense perception in my case. I think the picture might also show that the way I see the world is that I like to see everything in the picture and see the wider perspective, not just focus on little things.
If I was asked to pick the best flower out of all the sketches my classmates did then I would base my knowledge of beauty on amount of details in the picture and the angle of the picture.