Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Today in seventh hour, we got into a discussion concerning gun control in he US, in relationship to Pragmatic Theory. It was suggested that both sides to the argument (for and against) were justifiable through all three theories, and so there is no clear side. Like Hegel's theory, this creates a thesis and an antithesis. My question is, how do you (the TOK student) justify this controversial subject? How can you apply these theories to this, to properly justify your true beliefs so that you know something? Can two different people discussing the same topic know two completely different things? What other areas or topics of discussion can this apply to?