The big idea: Everything this topic has raised — power, access, whose knowledge counts — now runs through one force: technology.
With a phone you can read more than any king once could. So does technology finally SHARE knowledge with everyone — or does it hand even more power to those who already had it? That's the question that ties the whole topic together.
Technology is the great engine for spreading knowledge, so it decides who gains access — and whether the gaps between people get smaller or larger.
Free preview
This is the free notes preview
You're reading the free notes. Aimnova Pro unlocks the full study experience — and you can try it free for 7 days:
- FlashcardsLock in vocabulary and key terms with spaced repetition.
- Practice questionsAnswer exam-style questions and get instant AI marking.
- Mock exams & past-paper vaultSit full mocks and see exactly how examiners award marks.
- Personalised study planA daily plan built around your exam date and weak areas.
Start your 7-day free trial Full access to Aimnova Pro · cancel anytime
The evidence genuinely cuts both ways, so lay the two answers side by side before judging.
Technology NARROWS the gap
- Free encyclopedias and courses reach billions
- A cheap phone can out-read a whole old library
- Distant learners access the same lectures as the richest
Technology WIDENS the gap
- No device or signal = shut out entirely (the digital divide)
- Paywalls, patents and algorithms decide what you see
- Those who already had power own the platforms
Checkpoint — the tension: In one line: technology can either narrow the knowledge gap or widen it — and which one happens depends on power and access, not the gadget itself. Hold that — it's the whole topic in a nutshell.
Get feedback like a real examiner
Submit your answers and get instant feedback — what you did well, what's missing, and exactly what to write to score full marks.
Try AI Tutor Free7-day free trial • No card required
Go further — higher-level insight: See how technology gathers up every earlier micro. It's the newest form of Foucault's power/knowledge (whoever owns the platform shapes what you know); it's where 'access as a right' (Article 27) is won or lost; and its algorithms can quietly commit epistemic injustice, burying some voices and boosting others. Showing that technology is where all three earlier threads meet is a top-band synthesis.
The move that scores: In Paper 1 §B you don't just describe technology's effects. You argue a claim about it, test it against the other side, weigh them, and reach a reasoned conclusion. That doing philosophy is what the markbands reward.
How Section B works: Section B is a straight essay on your optional theme [25] — NO stimulus. You're given a claim and asked to Evaluate or Discuss it. The whole skill is to argue a view, test it against the strongest objection, weigh them, and reach a reasoned conclusion — using thinkers from the topic as evidence.
IB-style questionEvaluate[25 marks]
Evaluate the claim that technology narrows inequalities in access to knowledge.
Model answer plan
See the mark-by-mark plan — for / against / judgement, with marking guidance — in study mode.
Common mistakes: 1. Describing technology's effects instead of arguing the claim. 2. Only one side — top bands need the objection. 3. No thinkers — bring in Foucault, Fricker, Article 27 as evidence. 4. No conclusion — decide, with a reason. 5. Name-dropping — a name earns nothing without its argument.