May 2025 TOK essay titles

The May 2025 TOK essay titles, released by the International Baccalaureate Organization (IBO), encourage exploration of ethical responsibilities, the limitations of knowledge, and the implications of acquiring new insights across different Areas of Knowledge (AOKs).

These questions push students to reflect on the nature of knowledge, its reliability, and its impact on society. This blog provides an in-depth analysis of each essay title, offering realistic and reliable insights to help students approach these questions effectively.

TOK Essay Titles for May 2025

1. Do historians and human scientists have an ethical obligation to follow the
directive: do not ignore contradictory evidence”? Discuss with reference to history
and the human sciences.
2. Is our most revered knowledge more fragile than we assume it to be? Discuss with
reference to the arts and one other area of knowledge.
3. How can we reconcile the relentless drive to pursue knowledge with the finite
resources we have available? Discuss with reference to the natural sciences and
one other area of knowledge.

4. Do the ever-improving tools of an area of knowledge always result in improved
knowledge? Discuss with reference to two areas of knowledge.
5. To what extent do you agree with the claim “all models are wrong, but some are
useful” (attributed to George Box)? Discuss with reference to mathematics and one
other area of knowledge.
6. Does acquiring knowledge destroy our sense of wonder? Discuss with reference to
two areas of knowledge

May 2025 TOK essay titles Explanation 

1. Ethical Obligations in History and Human Sciences

Do historians and human scientists have an ethical obligation to follow the directive: ‘Do not ignore contradictory evidence’?
This question raises important issues regarding bias, integrity, and truth in knowledge production. In history, selective use of evidence can lead to distorted narratives, influencing national identity, political decisions, and cultural heritage. For example, historical revisionism, such as the denial of the Armenian Genocide or Holocaust revisionism, may intentionally exclude contradictory evidence to support a specific agenda.

Similarly, research that disregards opposing data in the human sciences can lead to flawed policies, such as biased psychological studies or inaccurate economic forecasts. Ethical obligations require knowledge producers to acknowledge and engage with contradictory evidence, ensuring a more accurate and holistic understanding of the past and human behavior.

2. The Fragility of Revered Knowledge

Is our most revered knowledge more fragile than we assume it to be?
This prompt, referencing the arts and another AOK, examines how widely respected or accepted knowledge can be subject to change. In the arts, interpretations shift over time due to cultural transformations, new artistic movements, and evolving audience perspectives.

For example, Vincent van Gogh’s work was once overlooked but is now considered groundbreaking, showing how artistic value can change over time. In science, the progression of knowledge can overturn previously accepted theories, as seen in the shift from Newtonian mechanics to Einstein’s theory of relativity. Ethical and philosophical knowledge also evolves, as seen in changing views on morality, such as the shift in attitudes toward LGBTQ+ rights. These examples demonstrate that even our most valued knowledge is susceptible to revision.

3. Knowledge Pursuit vs. Limited Resources

How can we reconcile the relentless drive to pursue knowledge with the finite resources we have available?
This question applies to the natural sciences and another AOK, emphasizing the practical limitations of knowledge acquisition. Scientific research often requires significant funding, infrastructure, and materials, leading to ethical dilemmas regarding resource allocation. For example, while advancing human knowledge, space exploration consumes billions of dollars that could be used for social issues like poverty alleviation.

Similarly, medical research must prioritize which diseases receive funding, raising ethical concerns about equity. Climate change research also faces resource constraints, requiring balancing funding between immediate societal needs and long-term sustainability. This topic invites discussions on sustainability, ethical research funding, and the necessity of balancing progress with available resources.

4. Tools and Their Impact on Knowledge Improvement

Do the ever-improving tools of an area of knowledge always result in improved knowledge?
This question challenges the assumption that technological advancements automatically enhance knowledge. While improved tools such as AI in research, digital imaging in medicine, and high-powered telescopes in astronomy can refine understanding, they also introduce new challenges, such as data biases, ethical concerns, and limitations in interpretation.

For instance, while AI algorithms can process vast amounts of data, they can also perpetuate biases depending on how they are programmed. In medicine, advanced diagnostic tools like MRI machines improve precision but may also lead to over-reliance on technology, sometimes at the expense of human judgment. While tools generally enhance knowledge acquisition, their limitations must be acknowledged, ensuring a balanced approach to evaluating their impact.

5. The Role of Models in Knowledge

To what extent do you agree with the claim “all models are wrong, but some are useful” (attributed to George Box)?
Models simplify reality to make complex concepts understandable, but their assumptions can introduce inaccuracies. In mathematics, models like probability distributions help in predictions, yet they do not always perfectly represent real-world situations. For example, economic models attempt to predict market behavior but often fail due to unpredictable human actions.

Similarly, climate models help forecast environmental changes but rely on assumptions that may not always hold, such as uncertainties in carbon emission projections. In medicine, models of disease spread, such as those used during the COVID-19 pandemic, helped guide policy but had limitations due to unpredictable human behavior and data gaps. This discussion should focus on the balance between practical utility and inherent limitations, recognizing that models, despite their imperfections, remain essential in knowledge development.

6. Knowledge and Wonder

Does acquiring knowledge destroy our sense of wonder?
This question encourages reflection on whether knowledge deepens appreciation or diminishes curiosity. In science, explanations of natural phenomena may reduce mystery, but they can also inspire awe. For instance, understanding black holes or the vast complexity of DNA sequencing enhances, rather than diminishes, our appreciation of the universe. In the arts, learning about techniques, historical context, and symbolism in paintings or literature can enrich one’s experience rather than limit it.

However, some argue that excessive analysis can strip away the emotional or mystical aspects of experience. For example, some say that dissecting poetry too deeply can remove its emotional impact. However, renowned physicist Richard Feynman argued that understanding something deeply enhances rather than detracts from its beauty. This topic allows for nuanced arguments on how knowledge can sustain or diminish a sense of wonder, ultimately questioning whether curiosity is finite or ever-expanding.

Read on TOK Essay Word Count and Formatting

Conclusion

The May 2025 TOK essay titles prompt students to critically analyze how knowledge is constructed, challenged, and developed across different disciplines. These questions highlight knowledge producers’ ethical responsibilities, models’ limitations, and the tension between curiosity and understanding.

By exploring these topics, students gain insight into the evolving nature of knowledge, the challenges of knowledge production, and how different AOKs contribute to our overall understanding of the world.

Ultimately, these discussions encourage a more thoughtful and reflective approach to learning, helping students appreciate knowledge’s complexities in its strengths and limitations. To further enhance these discussions, students should incorporate scholarly references and real-world examples to strengthen their arguments.