Focus:<\/strong> How do different forms of evidence shape our understanding of religious artifacts and miracles?<\/em> Learning objectives:<\/p>
Suggested length: 1 hour<\/p>\n
Critical Thinking Concepts<\/th> TOK Concepts<\/th> Reflection Questions<\/th><\/tr><\/thead> Confronting Biases and Assumptions:<\/strong> Recognize how religious believers and skeptics might selectively accept or reject evidence that aligns with their existing views and challenging the assumption of authority.
Exploring Contexts:<\/strong> Understand how different societies and historical periods shape the way religious relics and miracles are perceived, and examine how public belief about artifacts and miracles are influenced.
Responsiveness and Flexibility of Thought:<\/strong> Consider whether personal belief and empirical evidence can coexist when evaluating religious claims.
<\/td>Certainty:<\/strong> Can religious knowledge ever reach the same level of certainty as empirical knowledge, or does it operate under different epistemological assumptions?
Evidence: <\/strong>How do different types of evidence (scientific, historical, testimonial) influence the credibility of religious artifacts and miracles?
Truth: <\/strong>How can we understand the difference between truth based on scientific evidence and truth based on personal belief or faith?<\/td>Can religious artifacts and miracles ever be considered “true” with certainty? Why or why not?
What type of evidence is most convincing when evaluating religious knowledge — historical records, scientific testing, or personal belief?
If an artifact or miracle is widely accepted as real despite lacking scientific verification, does that make it true?
How do different standards of certainty apply to religious knowledge compared to scientific or historical knowledge?
<\/td><\/tr><\/tbody><\/table><\/figure>