Neutral question:
There is no such thing as a neutral question. Evaluate this statement with reference to two areas of knowledge.
a. What are the key words & terms that need pinning down?
The command term in the prescribed title is ‘neutral question’. A quick look in any dictionary will give you a workable definition of this word – its essential meaning is unbiased, non-partisan, or something that does not take sides.
In other words, the prescribed title is suggesting that questions within the different areas of knowledge lead us in a certain direction, and have some sort of agenda. These are known as ‘leading questions’, and are well known in the legal world, where witnesses are often asked questions designed to produce a particular answer that confirms what the questioner wants to prove. Gathering knowledge in this way can also be termed ‘confirmation bias’.
The essay is therefore suggesting, that all questions are leading questions, and that it isn’t possible to ask or investigate knowledge without having a preconceived notion of what you want to find.
b. What are the difficulties and challenges of the question?
Although it may seem at first sight that this is a prescribed title that is easy to refute, the more you explore the different areas of knowledge, the more you find that it is very difficult to escape the kind of biases that produce leading questions. So one difficulty might be that it’s hard to counter the claim within the prescribed title.
You could argue that the search for knowledge is in itself an agenda: as soon as you ask a question, you cease to be looking for knowledge in a ‘neutral’ way. If you subscribe to this view, then it would be virtually impossible to counter the claim in the prescribed title.
c. What knowledge issues & associated WOKs/AOKs could be explored?
d. What sort of real life situations could be drawn on?
e. Which perspectives and implications could be considered?