Skip to content

Knowledge Type Classification Game

Run the Knowledge Type Classification Game MicroSim Fullscreen
Edit in the p5.js Editor

About This MicroSim

This interactive MicroSim helps students explore the concept. It supports the learning objectives in Chapter: Theories of Truth and Knowledge.

How to Use

Interact with the visualization using the controls below the drawing area. Use the dropdown menu to switch between different examples or scenarios. Click buttons to step through stages or trigger actions.

Iframe Embed Code

You can add this MicroSim to any web page by adding this to your HTML:

1
2
3
4
<iframe src="https://dmccreary.github.io/theory-of-knowledge/sims/knowledge-type-classifier/main.html"
        height="450px"
        width="100%"
        scrolling="no"></iframe>

Lesson Plan

Grade Level

9-12 (High School / IB TOK)

Duration

15-20 minutes

Prerequisites

  • Basic understanding of what "knowledge" means in a TOK context
  • Awareness that there are different kinds of things we can "know" (facts, skills, experiences)
  • Familiarity with examples from everyday life that involve knowing how vs. knowing that

Learning Objectives

  • Classify knowledge examples as propositional (knowing that), procedural (knowing how), or acquaintance (knowing by experience)
  • Distinguish between a priori knowledge (independent of experience) and a posteriori knowledge (dependent on experience)

Activities

  1. Exploration (5 min): Work through the first phase of the classification quiz, which asks you to sort examples into propositional, procedural, or acquaintance knowledge. Read the feedback for each answer. Notice which examples are straightforward and which feel ambiguous — the borderline cases are where the most interesting TOK thinking happens.
  2. Guided Practice (10 min): Move to the second phase, which introduces the a priori vs. a posteriori distinction. Classify the same or new examples along this second axis. Then consider borderline cases with a partner: Is knowing that "water boils at 100 degrees Celsius" propositional a posteriori knowledge, or could someone argue it is a priori? Is "knowing how to ride a bicycle" purely procedural, or does it also involve acquaintance knowledge? List two examples where the classification is genuinely debatable.
  3. Assessment (5 min): Generate three original knowledge claims from your own life. For each, classify it along both dimensions (propositional/procedural/acquaintance AND a priori/a posteriori). Write one sentence justifying each classification. Flag any that you consider borderline and explain why.

Assessment

  • Correctly classifies at least five examples across the three knowledge types
  • Accurately applies the a priori/a posteriori distinction to at least three examples
  • Identifies and thoughtfully discusses at least one genuinely borderline case

Quiz

Test your understanding with this review question.

1. Which of the following is the best example of procedural knowledge that is also a posteriori?

  1. Knowing that 2 + 2 = 4
  2. Knowing how to swim, learned through practice in a pool
  3. Knowing what the color red looks like from personal experience
  4. Knowing that all bachelors are unmarried
Show Answer

The correct answer is B. Knowing how to swim is procedural knowledge (a skill or ability) and a posteriori (it must be learned through experience rather than pure reasoning). Option A is propositional and a priori. Option C is acquaintance knowledge. Option D is propositional and a priori (true by definition).

Concept Tested: Intersection of knowledge type classification and the a priori/a posteriori distinction

References

  1. Ryle, G. (1949). The Concept of Mind. Hutchinson.
  2. Russell, B. (1912). The Problems of Philosophy. Williams and Norgate. (Chapter 5: Knowledge by Acquaintance and Knowledge by Description.)
  3. Pritchard, D. (2018). What Is This Thing Called Knowledge? (4th ed.). Routledge.