Conquering International Philosophy Competitions: A CAIE Year 11 Student’s Guide | 征服国际哲学竞赛：CAIE 十一年级学生指南

📚 Conquering International Philosophy Competitions: A CAIE Year 11 Student’s Guide | 征服国际哲学竞赛：CAIE 十一年级学生指南

For Year 11 students following the CAIE Philosophy syllabus, the world of international competitions offers an unparalleled opportunity to deepen understanding, sharpen analytical skills, and stand out in university applications. This guide provides a structured strategy to merge your CAIE studies with preparation for prestigious contests such as the International Philosophy Olympiad (IPO), the John Locke Institute Essay Competition, and the Cambridge Re:think Prize. By leveraging your curriculum knowledge in epistemology, ethics, and political philosophy, you can build a strong foundation for competitive philosophical writing and argumentation.

对于修读 CAIE 哲学课程的十一年级学生来说，国际竞赛的世界提供了一个无与伦比的机会，可以深化理解、锻炼分析能力并在大学申请中脱颖而出。本指南提供了一套结构化策略，将你的 CAIE 学习与备战国际哲学奥林匹克（IPO）、约翰·洛克研究所论文竞赛以及剑桥 Re:think 奖项等著名赛事有机结合起来。通过利用你在认识论、伦理学和政 治哲学方面的课程知识，你可以为竞争性哲学写作和论证打下坚实基础。

1. Understanding the Competition Landscape | 了解竞赛格局

The major international philosophy competitions share a common emphasis on rigorous argumentation and originality, but their formats differ considerably. The International Philosophy Olympiad (IPO) requires competitors to write a philosophical essay in four hours on one of four given prompts, often drawn from classical or contemporary philosophical texts. The John Locke Essay Competition invites students to submit a researched essay on one of several set questions across philosophy, politics, economics, and law. Cambridge Re:think asks participants to produce an essay that critically engages with a broad theme, rewarding interdisciplinary insight and creative thinking. Familiarising yourself with these formats early allows you to tailor your preparation effectively.

主要的国际哲学竞赛都强调严谨的论证和原创性，但形式差异显著。国际哲学奥林匹克（IPO）要求参赛者在四小时内就四个指定题目（通常源自经典或当代哲学文本）中选取一个撰写哲学论文。约翰·洛克论文竞赛邀请学生从哲学、政治、经济、法律等多个领域中的若干设定问题里选择一个，提交一篇研究性论文。剑桥 Re:think 则要求参赛者产出一篇批判性探讨广泛主题的文章，奖励跨学科洞察力和创造性思维。尽早熟悉这些格式能让你有针对性地调整准备策略。

The CAIE Philosophy syllabus provides a solid thematic backbone. Your study of epistemology (Justified True Belief, Gettier cases, sources of knowledge) directly equips you for prompts about truth and justification. Ethics units on Utilitarianism, Deontology, and Virtue Ethics prepare you for questions on moral dilemmas. Political philosophy topics such as liberty, justice, and authority can be directly transposed to contest essays. Recognising these overlaps saves time and boosts confidence.

CAIE 哲学大纲提供了坚实的主题骨架。你对认识论的学习（确证的真信念、葛梯尔案例、知识来源）直接让你有能力应对关于真理与辩护的题目。关于功利主义、义务论和德性伦理的伦理学单元为你回答道德困境问题做好了准备。自由、正义与权威等政 治哲学主题可以直接移植到竞赛论文中。识别这些重叠之处能够节省时间并增强信心。

---

2. Mastering the CAIE Foundation: Epistemology | 掌握 CAIE 基石：认识论

Your CAIE epistemology module covers the tripartite definition of knowledge and the Gettier problem, which are essential for any philosophical essay. When a competition prompt asks ‘What is knowledge?’ you should be able to reconstruct the JTB account, present a standard Gettier case, and evaluate responses such as the ‘no false lemmas’ condition, reliabilism, or virtue epistemology. Practise writing concise explanations that first define each term clearly, then critically assess it. For example, you might write: ‘The JTB analysis states that S knows that p iff p is true, S believes that p, and S is justified in believing that p. Gettier’s counterexamples show that justified true belief can occur without knowledge, challenging the sufficiency of these conditions.’

你的 CAIE 认识论模块涵盖了知识的三元定义和葛梯尔问题，这对任何哲学论文都至关重要。如果竞赛题目问到“什么是知识？”你应当能够重构 JTB 解释，呈现标准的葛梯尔案例，并评估如“无错误引理”条件、可靠主义和德性认识论等回应方案。请练习撰写简明的解释，首先清晰地定义每个术语，然后进行批判性评估。例如，你可以这样写：“JTB 分析指出，S 知道命题 p 当且仅当 p 为真，S 相信 p，且 S 有理由相信 p。葛梯尔的反例表明，确证的真信念可以在没有知识的情况下出现，从而挑战了这些条件的充分性。”

To think like a competition judge, go beyond syllabus recall. Connect epistemology with ethics: can moral knowledge be analysed in the same way as factual knowledge? What about knowledge of other minds? Drawing these cross-topic links demonstrates the synthetic thinking prized in IPO and John Locke essays. Keep a ‘connections journal’ where you relate each CAIE topic to other areas of philosophy, current affairs, or personal experience. This practice builds the originality needed to stand out.

要像竞赛评委一样思考，你必须超越对大纲的复述。将认识论与伦理学联系起来：道德知识可以像事实知识一样进行分析吗？关于他心之知呢？建立这些跨主题的联系，能够展现在 IPO 和约翰·洛克论文中备受推崇的综合思维。准备一本“联系日志”，将每个 CAIE 主题与哲学的其他领域、时事或个人经验联系起来。这种练习可以培养你脱颖而出所需的原创性。

---

3. Leveraging Ethics for Competitive Arguments | 利用伦理学建构竞赛论证

Ethics forms the core of many competition prompts because moral problems are inherently engaging and allow for personal reflection. Your CAIE syllabus introduces Utilitarianism (Bentham, Mill), Deontology (Kant), and Virtue Ethics (Aristotle), along with applied issues such as animal rights, abortion, and euthanasia. For competition essays, do not merely describe these theories; apply them to novel scenarios. A prompt like ‘Should we sacrifice one to save many?’ requires you to weigh utilitarian calculus against Kantian respect for persons. Use the language of ‘prima facie duties’ or ‘the doctrine of double effect’ to add sophistication.

伦理学是许多竞赛题目核心，因为道德问题本身就引人入胜，并允许个人反思。你的 CAIE 大纲介绍了功利主义（边沁、密尔）、义务论（康德）和德性伦理（亚里士多德），以及动物权利、堕胎和安乐死等应用议题。对于竞赛论文，不要仅仅描述这些理论；要将它们应用于新颖的情境。像“我们是否应该牺牲一人以拯救多人？”这样的题目要求你权衡功利主义的计算与康德式对人的尊重。使用“显见义务”或“双重效果论”等语汇可以增加论文的深度。

To excel, practise crafting a ‘thesis-led’ response. For instance, defend a nuanced position: ‘While utilitarianism rightly demands we consider the net consequences, a purely aggregative approach violates the inherent dignity of individuals. Therefore, a pluralistic framework that incorporates side-constraints better captures our moral intuitions.’ Support each claim with examples, both classic (trolley problems) and original (real-world medical triage or autonomous vehicle dilemmas). The John Locke Competition particularly values such balanced, evidence-based argumentation.

要脱颖而出，请练习构思“以论点为主导”的回应。例如，为一个有细微差别的立场辩护：“虽然功利主义正确地要求我们考虑净后果，但纯粹聚合式的方法却侵犯了个体的内在尊严。因此，一个包含边际约束的多元论框架更能捕捉我们的道德直觉。”用经典案例（电车难题）和原创案例（现实世界的医疗分诊或自动驾驶汽车困境）来支持每一个论断。约翰·洛克竞赛尤其看重这种平衡、基于证据的论证。

---

4. Political Philosophy and Social Justice | 政 治哲学与社会正义

The CAIE political philosophy segment covers concepts like liberty (negative vs. positive), justice (Rawls’ theory of justice), and the limits of state authority. These topics are rich fodder for competition essays addressing inequality, rights, or the role of government. For example, a prompt on ‘redistributive taxation’ can be approached through Rawls’ difference principle, Nozick’s entitlement theory, and Mill’s harm principle. You should be able to articulate the core of each position in a few crisp sentences: ‘Rawls argues that inequalities are only just if they benefit the least advantaged, while Nozick contends that any state-forced redistribution violates individual property rights acquired through just transfer.’

CAIE 政 治哲学部分涵盖了自由（消极自由与积极自由）、正义（罗尔斯的正义理论）以及国家权力的限度等概念。这些主题是回应不平等、权利或政府角色等竞赛论文的丰富素材。例如，一个关于“再分配税收”的题目可以通过罗尔斯的差异原则、诺齐克的资格理论和密尔的伤害原则来探讨。你应该能够用几句精练的句子清晰表述每个立场的核心：“罗尔斯主张，不平等只有在对最不利者有利时才是正义的，而诺齐克则断言，任何国家强制的再分配都侵犯了通过正当转移获得的个人财产权。”

Competition essays often require a critical engagement with contemporary issues. You might connect philosophical theories to real-world policies, such as universal basic income, affirmative action, or climate justice. For instance, evaluate whether Rawls’ veil of ignorance would endorse UBI. This demonstrates applied philosophical reasoning that aligns with the ethos of Cambridge Re:think. Keep a folder of current news articles and trace their philosophical underpinnings to enrich your argumentative repertoire.

竞赛论文往往要求对当代问题进行批判性探讨。你可以将哲学理论与现实世界的政策（如全民基本收入、平权行动或气候正义）联系起来。例如，评估罗尔斯的无知之幕是否会支持全民基本收入。这展示了与剑桥 Re:think 精神相符的应用哲学推理。建立一个当下新闻文章的文件夹，追溯其哲学基础，以丰富你的论证库。

---

5. Crafting a Philosophical Essay: Structure and Clarity | 打造哲学论文：结构与清晰

All major competitions prize clear structure above stylistic flourish. A winning essay typically follows: an introduction that directly answers the question and states your thesis; a section that defines key terms and sets out the philosophical landscape; a series of arguments that develop your position, each in its own paragraph; careful consideration of the strongest objections and your rebuttals; and a conclusion that synthesises without mere repetition. Your CAIE Paper 2 practice essays provide an excellent training ground for this structure.

所有主要竞赛都将清晰的结构置于华丽的文风之上。一篇获奖论文通常遵循这样的结构：直接回答问题并陈述论点的引言；定义关键术语并勾勒哲学图景的段落；一系列发展你立场的论证，每个段落独立展开；对最强反对意见及其反驳的细致考量；以及一个具有综合性的结论而非简单重复。你的 CAIE 卷二练习论文为这种结构提供了绝佳的训练场。

Clarity is a philosophical virtue. Write short, declarative sentences that express one idea at a time. Use signposting language: ‘I will first argue…’; ‘The strongest objection to this is…’; ‘In response, I contend that…’ Avoid jargon unless you define it precisely. For example, instead of saying ‘the instantiation of noumenal agency,’ write ‘acting according to moral law that one gives to oneself, as Kant describes.’ Pretend you are explaining the argument to an intelligent but non-specialist reader. The IPO rubric explicitly rewards clarity and analytical precision.

清晰是一种哲学美德。使用短小、陈述性的句子，一次表达一个观点。使用路标性语言：“我将首先论证……”；“对此最有力的反对是……”；“作为回应，我主张……”。除非你能精确定义，否则避免使用术语。例如，与其说“本体能动性的实例化”，不如写“如康德所述，依照自己给予自己的道德律而行动”。假设你正在向一个聪明但非专业的读者解释这一论证。IPO 评分标准明确奖励清晰和分析的精确性。

---

6. Training for the IPO Four-Hour Essay | 备战 IPO 四小时论文

The IPO’s timed essay demands a unique skill set: rapid philosophical analysis, efficient planning, and sustained focus. Start by building a repertoire of ‘go-to’ philosophical examples and thought experiments from your CAIE studies: the ring of Gyges, the experience machine, Mary’s room, the trolley problem. Being able to recall these vividly under time pressure saves precious minutes. Create a one-page summary sheet for each major philosopher you have studied—Plato, Aristotle, Kant, Mill, etc.—including key quotes (with proper attribution) and core arguments.

IPO 的限时论文要求一套独特的技能：快速的哲学分析、高效的规划以及持续专注。首先，从你的 CAIE 学习中建立一个“常用”哲学实例和思想实验库：盖吉斯之戒、体验机、玛丽小屋、电车难题。能在时间压力下生动地回忆起这些案例可节省宝贵的分钟。为你学过的每一位主要哲学家——柏拉图、亚里士多德、康德、密尔等——制作一张单页摘要，包括关键引文（需注明出处）和核心论证。

Simulate exam conditions at least twice a month. Choose a past IPO prompt (e.g., ‘Can we know what is right?’ or ‘Is freedom an illusion?’), give yourself exactly 15 minutes to outline, 45 minutes to draft an introduction and argument structure, and the remaining 3 hours to write. Then, critically review your essay with your teacher or using the official IPO criteria: relevance, coherence, originality, clarity of structure, and philosophical understanding. Pay special attention to whether you have addressed the prompt directly throughout—a common failing is drifting into prepared material that does not answer the specific question.

每月至少模拟考试条件两次。选择一个过往的 IPO 题目（如“我们能否知道何为正确？”或“自由是一种幻觉吗？”），给自己正好 15 分钟列提纲，45 分钟起草引言和论证结构，剩下的 3 小时用于写作。然后，与老师一起或依据 IPO 官方标准批判性地审视你的论文：相关性、连贯性、原创性、结构清晰度和哲学理解。特别注意你是否自始至终都直接回应了题目——一个常见的失误是偏离到准备好的材料上，而没有回答具体问题。

---

7. Succeeding in the John Locke Essay Competition | 在约翰·洛克论文竞赛中取胜

The John Locke Institute rewards rigorous research and the ability to engage with a broad range of scholarly sources. Unlike the IPO, this competition allows extended preparation and expects footnotes and a bibliography. Your CAIE syllabus can be the starting point, but you must go beyond it. For a question on ‘Does history repeat itself?’ (as a philosophical question about determinism and free will), you might incorporate Hegel’s dialectics, Ibn Khaldun’s cyclical theory, and Popper’s critique of historicism alongside modern philosophy of history. Use online academic databases like JSTOR, PhilPapers, or Google Scholar, which many schools provide access to.

约翰·洛克研究所奖励严谨的研究和与广泛学术来源进行对话的能力。与 IPO 不同，这项竞赛允许长期准备，并期待出现脚注和参考文献。你的 CAIE 大纲可以是起点，但你必须超越它。对于一个“历史会重演吗？”的问题（作为一个关于决定论与自由意志的哲学问题），你可以将黑格尔的辩证法、伊本·赫勒敦的循环理论、波普对历史决定论的批判与现代历史哲学结合起来。使用诸如 JSTOR、PhilPapers 或谷歌学术等在线学术数据库，许多学校都提供访问权限。

Your essay must demonstrate an original voice. Begin by benchmarking the existing debate: ‘Scholars have typically approached this issue by X, but I argue that Y.’ Use a clear thesis statement in your introduction that takes a definitive stance. For the main body, organise your paragraphs thematically or by philosopher, not just by chronology. Show intellectual maturity by engaging charitably with counterarguments before refuting them. The John Locke judges are looking for candidates who can think like a young scholar, not merely a diligent student. Edit ruthlessly for concision and precision, and solicit feedback from multiple mentors before submission.

你的论文必须展现原创的声音。首先，对标现有的辩论：“学者们通常以 X 的方式处理这个问题，但我主张 Y。”在引言中使用一个立场明确的论点陈述。就主体而言，按主题或哲学家来组织段落，而不是仅仅按时间顺序。在驳斥反对意见之前，以宽容的态度与其交锋，从而展现智识成熟。约翰·洛克的评委们寻找的是能够像年轻学者一样思考的候选人，而不仅仅是勤奋的学生。为求简洁和准确，要毫不留情地编辑，并在提交前寻求多位导师的反馈。

---

8. The Cambridge Re:think Prize: Interdisciplinary Engagement | 剑桥 Re:think 奖项：跨学科参与

The Cambridge Re:think essay prize explicitly values interdisciplinary work, making it a perfect match for CAIE philosophy students who can draw connections to subjects like English Literature, History, or the Sciences. A typical prompt, such as ‘Can machines think?’, invites philosophical reflection on consciousness and computation (Turing, Searle’s Chinese Room) but also encourages perspectives from cognitive science, AI ethics, and literary depictions of intelligence. Plan your essay by creating a concept map that links philosophical concepts to concrete examples from other disciplines. For the machines question, you might discuss large language models like GPT, while rooting your argument in theories of intentionality.

剑桥 Re:think 论文奖项明确看重跨学科工作，这使其成为能够与英国文学、历史或科学等学科建立联系的 CAIE 哲学学生的完美匹配。一个典型的题目，如“机器能思考吗？”，邀请人们对意识与计算进行哲学反思（图灵、塞尔的“中文屋”），但也鼓励来自认知科学、人工智能伦理以及文学中对智能描绘的视角。在规划论文时，创建一个概念图，将哲学概念与其他学科的具体实例联系起来。关于机器问题，你可以讨论像 GPT 这样的大语言模型，同时将你的论证植根于意向性理论。

Your essay should trace a clear argumentative arc that utilises the interdisciplinary lenses to deepen, not distract from, the philosophical analysis. For example: ‘The question of machine thought requires us to examine not only functionalist theories of mind but also the embodied, affective, and social dimensions of cognition highlighted by phenomenology. While a Turing test might be passed, genuine understanding, as Merleau-Ponty suggests, may require a lived body.’ This approach shows judges that you can synthesise complex material into a compelling whole. Keep your tone accessible but not oversimplified, and avoid heavy jargon from non-philosophy fields without explanation.

你的论文应描绘出一条清晰的论证弧线，利用跨学科视角来深化而非分散哲学分析。例如：“机器能否思考的问题不仅要求我们审视心灵的功能主义理论，还要求我们考虑现象学所强调的认知的具身、情感与社会维度。虽然图灵测试可能被通过，但如梅洛-庞蒂所暗示的那样，真正的理解可能需要一个活的身体。”这种方法向评委展示了你能够将复杂材料综合成一个令人信服的整体。保持语气平易近人但不过度简化，并避免在没有解释的情况下使用非哲学领域的繁重术语。

---

9. Sharpening Analytical Skills Through Logic | 通过逻辑磨炼分析能力

Formal logic, while not the primary focus of CAIE philosophy, is invaluable for competition success. Understanding basic propositional logic—modus ponens, modus tollens, the fallacy of affirming the consequent—allows you to dissect arguments with surgical precision. For example, when evaluating an opponent’s claim, you might identify: ‘This argument commits the fallacy of equivocation, shifting the meaning of ‘right’ from a legal entitlement to a moral claim.’ Incorporate some formal notation in your writing only when it illuminates the reasoning, e.g., ‘If P → Q, and P is true, Q must follow.’

形式逻辑虽然并非 CAIE 哲学的主要焦点，但对竞赛成功却是无价之宝。理解基本的命题逻辑——肯定前件、否定后件、肯定后件的谬误——使你能够像手术刀一样精确地剖析论证。例如，在评估对手的主张时，你可能会指出：“这一论证犯了歧义谬误，将‘权利’的含义从法律赋予的权利偷换成了道德主张。”仅当形式化符号能阐明推理时，才将其纳入写作中，例如：“如果 P → Q，且 P 为真，则 Q 必然成立。”

Practise ‘logging’ your daily reasoning. Whenever you read an opinion piece or listen to a debate, write down a quick reconstruction: Premise 1, Premise 2, Conclusion. Then check for hidden assumptions. This habit builds the quick analytical reflexes needed for the IPO timed essay and sharpens your John Locke rebuttals. Additionally, study informal fallacies such as ad hominem, straw man, and false dilemma. Competent judges are swift to penalise fallacious reasoning, and recognising these fallacies in your own drafts is crucial for self-editing.

练习为你的日常推理做“日志”。无论何时你阅读一篇评论文章或听一场辩论，都快速写下重构：前提一、前提二、结论。然后检查隐藏的假设。这一习惯能培养 IPO 限时论文所需的快速分析反射，并强化你的约翰·洛克反驳。此外，学习非形式谬误，如人身攻击、稻草人和虚假两难。称职的评委很快就会惩罚谬误推理，而在你自己的草稿中识别这些谬误对于自我编辑至关重要。

---

10. Building a Reading List Beyond the Syllabus | 构建超越大纲的阅读清单

To compete at an international level, you must read beyond the prescribed CAIE texts. Begin with primary sources: read one Platonic dialogue (e.g., Meno for epistemology, Crito for political obligation), sections of Aristotle’s Nicomachean Ethics, Kant’s Groundwork, and Mill’s On Liberty. For each, write a one-page précis that captures the central argument and your critique. Then, branch into accessible contemporary philosophy: Thomas Nagel’s ‘What Is It Like to Be a Bat?’ (philosophy of mind), Judith Jarvis Thomson’s ‘A Defense of Abortion,’ and Peter Singer’s ‘Famine, Affluence, and Morality.’ These are frequently referenced in competition prompts and responses.

要在国际级水平上竞争，你必须阅读超越 CAIE 指定文本的内容。从原始文献开始：阅读一篇柏拉图对话录（如《美诺篇》对应认识论，《克力同篇》对应政治义务），选读亚里士多德的《尼各马可伦理学》、康德的《道德形而上学基础》以及密尔的《论自由》。为每篇写一页纸的摘要，捕捉其核心论点及你的批判。然后，扩展到易读的当代哲学：托马斯·内格尔的“成为一只蝙蝠是什么样？”（心灵哲学），朱迪思·贾维斯·汤姆逊的“为堕胎辩护”，以及彼得·辛格的“饥荒、富裕与道德”。这些文献在竞赛题目和回应中被频繁引用。

Your reading should fuel a ‘quotation bank’ of memorable, well-attributed lines. Use them sparingly to anchor your argument, not as decoration. For example, Aristotle’s ‘man is by nature a political animal’ can open a discussion on the state, but you must immediately analyse what it implies for your thesis. Also, read winning essays from past competitions (often available online) to internalise the standard of excellence. Analyse their structure, argument flow, and use of sources—treat them as exemplars to emulate and eventually surpass.

你的阅读应为你的“引文库”提供令人难忘且出处清晰的语句。谨慎地使用它们来锚定你的论证，而非作为装饰。例如，亚里士多德的“人天生是政治动物”可以开启关于国家的讨论，但你必须立即分析这对于你的论点意味着什么。同时，阅读过往竞赛的获奖论文（通常可在线获取），以内在化卓越的标准。分析它们的结构、论证流程和对来源的运用——把它们当作榜样来模仿，并最终超越。

---

11. Ethics of AI and Emerging Frontiers | 人工智能伦理与新兴前沿

Current affairs and technological change provide fresh philosophical content that judges appreciate. The rise of generative AI, algorithmic bias, and existential risk from advanced AI are rich areas where CAIE ethics and epistemology intersect. A prompt might ask, ‘Should we develop superintelligent AI?’ Your response could draw on utilitarian risk-benefit analysis, Kantian concerns about treating humanity as an end, and even existentialist ideas about the meaning of human life in a post-singularity world. Demonstrating philosophical engagement with cutting-edge issues signals a lively, curious intellect.

时事与科技变革为哲学论文提供了评委所欣赏的新鲜内容。生成式 AI 的兴起、算法偏见以及高级人工智能带来的生存风险，是 CAIE 伦理学和认识论相交汇的丰富领域。一个题目可能会问：“我们应该发展超级智能 AI 吗？”你的回答可以借鉴功利主义的风险-收益分析、康德关于把人性始终当作目的而非手段的关切，乃至存在主义关于后奇点世界中人类生命意义的观点。展现对前沿问题的哲学参与，表明你是一个活跃且充满好奇心的思想者。

However, avoid the trap of offering mere opinion unsupported by philosophical rigour. For any technology prompt, ground your argument in established frameworks. For example, when discussing AI moral status, you might contrast Peter Singer’s utilitarian extension of moral considerability to all sentient beings with a Kantian view that rationality grounds moral consideration. Use hypothetical scenarios (the ‘paperclip maximiser’ thought experiment) to illustrate risks while maintaining analytical detachment. The Cambridge Re:think prize especially welcomes this kind of philosophically informed future-oriented thinking.

然而，要避免落入提供未经哲学严谨性支持的纯主观意见的陷阱。对于任何技术类题目，都要将你的论证植根于既有的框架之中。例如，在讨论 AI 的道德地位时，你可以将彼得·辛格将所有有感知者纳入道德考量的功利主义延伸，与将理性奠基为道德考量的康德式观点进行对比。使用假想情境（“回形针最大化器”思想实验）来说明风险，同时保持分析的客观性。剑桥 Re:think 奖项尤其欢迎这种具有哲学素养的前瞻性思维。

---

12. Personalised Preparation Schedule and Mindset | 个性化备考时间表与心态

Success in international philosophy competitions is the product of consistent, strategic effort. Design a weekly schedule that balances CAIE revision with competition practice. For example: Monday—review one CAIE topic and write a short essay plan; Wednesday—analyse a competition prompt and draft an outline; Friday—read one piece of primary or secondary literature and add to your quotation bank; Saturday—full timed essay practice or research session for John Locke/Re:think. Even 30 minutes a day, if focused, yields significant progress over a year.

在国际哲学竞赛中取得成功，是持久且具有战略性努力的产物。设计一份周计划，平衡 CAIE 复习与竞赛练习。例如：周一—回顾一个 CAIE 主题并撰写一篇简短的论文提纲；周三—分析一个竞赛题目并起草大纲；周五—阅读一篇一手或二手文献并充实你的引文库；周六—全真限时论文演练或为约翰·洛克/Re:think 进行研究。即使每天 30 分钟，只要专注，一年下来也会取得显著进步。

Cultivate a growth mindset. Your first few practice essays may feel clumsy; treat them as diagnostics. Ask for specific feedback: ‘Is my thesis clear? Does my third paragraph engage with the strongest objection? Is my conclusion distinct from the introduction?’ Build a support network of like-minded peers, perhaps forming a philosophy circle at school that discusses competition prompts. Sharing drafts and critiques fosters the collaborative yet rigorous spirit of philosophical enquiry. Remember, the goal is not merely to win a prize but to become a better thinker. The skills you develop—precision, critical analysis, persuasive writing—will serve you in any academic or professional path.

培养成长型心态。你最初几篇练习论文可能会显得笨拙；将其视为诊断工具。寻求具体的反馈：“我的论点清晰吗？第三段是否与最强的反对意见交锋？结论与引言是否明确不同？”搭建一个志同道合的同辈支持网络，或许可以在校内组建一个哲学社团，讨论竞赛题目。交流草稿与批判意见，能培养哲学探究所需的协作而严谨的精神。请记住，目标不仅仅是获奖，更是成为一名更优秀的思考者。你所发展的技能——精确性、批判性分析、说服性写作——将在任何学术或职业道路上助你一臂之力。

Published by TutorHao | Philosophy Revision Series | aleveler.com

更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）