📚 Year 11 CAIE Philosophy: Vocabulary & Terminology Quick Memorisation Guide | Year 11 CAIE 哲学：词汇术语速记指南
Building a precise philosophical vocabulary is the key to unlocking top marks in CAIE Year 11 Philosophy. This guide breaks down the core terms you will meet across epistemology, ethics, philosophy of religion and mind, pairing each concept with a memorable explanation in both English and Chinese. Use these bite‑sized definitions to strengthen your essays, sharpen your analysis and recall the right terminology under exam pressure.
建立精确的哲学词汇是拿下 CAIE 11 年级哲学高分的钥匙。本指南将拆解你在认识论、伦理学、宗教哲学与心灵哲学中遇到的核心术语，为每个概念搭配了中英双语的巧记解释。利用这些精简定义，你可以在考试压力下强化论证、深化分析并准确回忆术语。
1. Foundational Terms: A Priori vs. A Posteriori | 基础术语：先验与后验
A priori knowledge is justified independently of sense experience. You can know that ‘all bachelors are unmarried’ just by thinking about the meanings of the words; no observation is needed. The justification comes from reason alone, making it a pillar of rationalist philosophy.
先验知识的辩护不依赖于感官经验。你仅靠思考词语的含义就能知道“所有单身汉都未婚”，无需任何观察。其辩护纯粹来自理性，因此成为理性主义哲学的支柱。
A posteriori knowledge depends on empirical evidence—information we gain through sight, hearing or experiment. The claim ‘water boils at 100°C at sea level’ can only be justified after you have observed the boiling many times.
后验知识依赖于经验证据——我们通过视觉、听觉或实验获得的信息。“水在海平面 100°C 沸腾”只有在反复观察沸腾现象后才能得到辩护。
Memory tip: ‘a priori’ sounds like ‘prior’ to experience; ‘a posteriori’ contains ‘post’—after experience.
记忆窍门：’a priori’ 听起来像在经验“之前”（prior）；’a posteriori’ 含有 “post”（之后），即经验之后。
2. Rationalism vs. Empiricism | 理性主义与经验主义
Rationalism holds that reason is the primary source of knowledge, and certain innate ideas exist in the mind from birth. Descartes famously argued ‘I think, therefore I am’ (Cogito, ergo sum) as a piece of knowledge reached purely through thinking. Leibniz added that necessary truths, such as mathematics, must come from the intellect, not the senses.
理性主义主张理性是知识的首要来源，心灵中存在着某些与生俱来的天赋观念。笛卡尔著名的“我思故我在”（Cogito, ergo sum）就是纯粹通过思考获得的知识。莱布尼茨补充说，必然真理（如数学）必定来自理智，而非感官。
Empiricism counters that all knowledge begins with sense experience. Locke described the mind at birth as a tabula rasa (blank slate). Berkeley pushed this further, claiming that to be is to be perceived (esse est percipi). Hume applied empiricism rigorously, concluding that causality is merely a habit of the mind built by repeated observation.
经验主义则主张一切知识始于感官经验。洛克将出生时的心灵描述为一块白板（tabula rasa）。贝克莱进一步主张，存在即被感知（esse est percipi）。休谟将经验主义严格应用于因果性，得出因果只是心灵通过反复观察形成的习惯。
Quick recall: rationalists rely on reason (the R’s pair up), empiricists rely on experience (the E’s pair up).
快速回忆：理性主义者依赖理性（rationalists & reason 皆为 R 开头），经验主义者依赖经验（empiricists & experience 皆为 E 开头）。
3. The Nature of Knowledge: Justified True Belief | 知识的本质：得到辩护的真信念
Since Plato, knowledge has often been analysed as justified true belief (JTB). To say ‘S knows that P’, three conditions must be met: the proposition P must be true; S must believe that P; and S must have adequate justification for believing P. Without justification, a lucky guess does not count as knowledge.
自柏拉图以来，知识常被分析为得到辩护的真信念（JTB）。要声称“S 知道 P”，须满足三个条件：命题 P 必须为真；S 必须相信 P；并且 S 必须有充分的理由为这一信念辩护。缺少辩护的碰巧猜中，不能算作知识。
Gettier cases challenge JTB by offering scenarios where someone has a justified true belief that seems to rest on a false assumption, suggesting knowledge requires something more—perhaps no false lemmas or a causal connection.
葛梯尔案例挑战了 JTB，列举出一个人持有得到辩护的真信念却依赖于错误假定的情形。这表明知识或许还需要更多条件——比如没有错误引理，或者存在合适的因果联系。
Memory structure: think of a three-legged stool—Truth, Belief, Justification—remove one leg and knowledge collapses.
记忆结构：想象一把三条腿的凳子——真、信念、辩护——少一条腿，知识就站不住。
4. Moral Philosophy: Utilitarianism | 道德哲学：功利主义
Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory stating that the right action is the one that produces the greatest happiness for the greatest number. Bentham’s act utilitarianism uses the hedonic calculus to measure pleasure and pain across intensity, duration, certainty and extent. His principle is often summarised as ‘the greatest good for the greatest number’.
功利主义是一种后果论理论，主张正确的行为就是能为最大多数人带来最大幸福的行为。边沁的行为功利主义运用快乐计算法，从强度、持续时间、确定性与广度等维度衡量苦乐。他的原则常被概括为“最大多数人的最大幸福”。
Mill refined this by distinguishing higher and lower pleasures. He argued that intellectual pleasures (reading poetry) are qualitatively superior to bodily pleasures, even if a pig prefers its sty. He famously wrote: ‘It is better to be a human being dissatisfied than a pig satisfied.’
密尔通过区分高级快乐与低级快乐加以改进。他主张智性快乐（如读诗）在质上优于肉体快乐，即便猪更喜爱泥塘。他有句名言：“做一个不满的人比做一只满足的猪更好。”
Exam trigger: when you see ‘consequences’ or ‘happiness’, think utilitarian; always check if it is act or rule utilitarianism.
考试触发词：看到“后果”或“幸福”，想到功利主义；务必区分是行为功利主义还是规则功利主义。
5. Moral Philosophy: Deontology | 道德哲学：义务论
Deontology judges the morality of an action based on duty and rules, not consequences. Kant’s ethics centre on the categorical imperative: act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law. Lying is prohibited because if everyone lied, trust would collapse, making the practice of lying self-defeating.
义务论基于义务与规则判断行为的道德性，而非后果。康德的伦理学以定言命令为核心：只依据那样一个准则去行动，你同时能够意愿它成为一条普遍的法则。禁止撒谎是因为如果人人都撒谎，信任将崩塌，撒谎本身便不再可能。
Another formulation emphasises treating humanity never merely as a means, but always as an end in itself. Deontology thus protects individual dignity, even when a lie might produce good consequences.
另一表述强调，永远不要只把人当作手段，而要始终当作目的本身。义务论因此捍卫个体尊严，即便撒谎可能带来好的后果。
Visual cue: picture a moral compass with unbreakable arrows pointing to duty—the arrows never bend to outcomes.
视觉提示：想象一个道德指南针，不可折断的箭头指向义务——箭头从不因后果而弯曲。
6. Moral Philosophy: Virtue Ethics | 道德哲学：美德伦理学
Virtue ethics shifts the focus from ‘What should I do?’ to ‘What kind of person should I be?’. Aristotle argued that the good life (eudaimonia) is achieved by cultivating virtues—character traits that lie at the golden mean between two vices. Courage, for instance, is the mean between cowardice and recklessness.
美德伦理学把重心从“我应该做什么？”转向“我应该成为什么样的人？”。亚里士多德认为，良善的生活（eudaimonia）通过培养美德来实现——美德是处于两种恶之间的黄金中道。例如，勇敢是怯懦与鲁莽之间的中道。
A virtuous person acts from a firm, unchanging character, enjoying doing the right thing. Practical wisdom (phronesis) is needed to judge where the mean lies in each situation. The theory treats morality as a skill developed through habituation, much like learning to play an instrument.
有德之人从坚定不变的品格出发，乐于行正确之事。实践智慧（phronesis）用来判断具体情境下的中道所在。该理论将道德视为通过习惯养成的技能，很像学习弹奏乐器。
Recall phrase: ‘Virtues are means between extremes’; think of a thermostat set at the ideal temperature.
记忆口诀：“美德是两极之间的中道”；想象一个设定在理想温度的恒温器。
7. Philosophy of Religion: Theodicies | 宗教哲学：神义论
A theodicy is an attempt to reconcile the existence of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God with the presence of evil and suffering. Augustine’s theodicy traces evil to the misuse of free will by angels and humans. Evil is a privation—an absence of good—rather than a positive substance created by God.
神义论试图调和全能全善的上帝与世间存在的恶和苦难。奥古斯丁的神义论将恶追溯至天使和人类对自由意志的滥用。恶是一种亏缺——善的缺席——而非上帝创生的实体。
Irenaean theodicy, developed by John Hick, views suffering as a necessary part of soul-making. Through struggle, humans grow towards moral and spiritual maturity, in a world designed to be a ‘vale of soul-making’. Free will is essential so that virtue can be genuinely developed.
爱任纽式神义论由约翰·希克发展，视苦难为塑造灵魂的必要过程。人类在挣扎中走向道德与灵性的成熟，世界正是为此而被设计为“铸魂之谷”。自由意志不可或缺，唯有如此，美德才能真正发展起来。
Memory link: Augustine starts with a perfect creation ruined by free will; Irenaeus sees creation as incomplete, heading towards perfection.
记忆链接：奥古斯丁始于完美的创造为自由意志所败坏；爱任纽视创造为未完成，正走向完善。
8. Arguments for God’s Existence: Cosmological & Teleological | 上帝存在的证明：宇宙论与目的论
The cosmological argument claims that the existence of the universe demands a cause or explanation. Aquinas’ First Way argues from motion: everything in motion must be moved by something else; there cannot be an infinite regress of movers, so a first unmoved mover—God—must exist.
宇宙论论证主张，宇宙的存在需要一个原因或解释。阿奎那的“第一路”从运动出发论证：一切运动的事物必被他物所推动；不能有无穷倒退的推动者，因此必然存在一个第一不动的推动者——上帝。
The teleological argument, or argument from design, points to the order, purpose and complexity observed in nature. Paley’s watchmaker analogy suggests that if you find a watch on a heath, you infer a watchmaker; likewise, the intricate design of the universe implies a divine designer.
目的论论证（或称设计论证）指向自然中观察到的秩序、目的和复杂性。佩利的钟表匠类比认为，如果你在荒野上发现一只钟表，你会推断有一位钟表匠；同样地，宇宙精巧的设计也暗示着一位神圣的设计者。
Distinction trigger: Cosmological = cause (universe began), Teleological = design (universe looks arranged).
区别触发词：宇宙论 = 原因（宇宙有个开端），目的论 = 设计（宇宙看起来经过了安排）。
9. Mind-Body Problem: Dualism vs. Materialism | 心身问题：二元论与唯物主义
Substance dualism, famously defended by Descartes, holds that the mind and body are two distinct substances: the mind is non‑physical, thinking and unextended; the body is physical, non‑thinking and extended. The interaction problem immediately arises—how can an immaterial mind move a material body?
实体二元论由笛卡尔著名地辩护，主张心灵与身体是两种不同的实体：心灵是非物质的、思维的、不占广延的；身体是物质的、不思维的、占有广延的。互动难题随之而来：非物质的心灵如何推动物质的身体？
Materialism replies that mental states are identical to brain states. Smart’s identity theory treats sensations like pain as identical to certain neural processes. Eliminative materialism goes further, suggesting that our everyday mental vocabulary (‘belief’, ‘desire’) may be radically false and will be replaced by completed neuroscience.
唯物主义则回应称，心理状态等同于大脑状态。斯马特的同一论将疼痛等感觉等同于特定的神经过程。取消式唯物主义更进一步，认为我们日常的心理词汇（“信念”、“欲望”）可能在根本上是错误的，终将被成熟的神经科学所取代。
Test cue: Dualism = two stuffs; Materialism = one stuff (physical). If a question mentions ‘pineal gland’ or ‘consciousness as non‑physical’, dualism is on stage.
考试线索：二元论 = 两种质料；唯物主义 = 一种质料（物理的）。如果考题提到“松果腺”或“非物质的意识”，二元论便登场了。
10. Key Logical Fallacies | 关键逻辑谬误
Philosophy exams often require you to spot flawed reasoning. An ad hominem fallacy attacks the person making an argument rather than the argument itself. Begging the question occurs when the conclusion is assumed in the premise—’We know the Bible is true because the Bible says so.’
哲学考试常要求你识别有缺陷的推理。人身攻击谬误攻击的是提出论证的人，而非论证本身。乞题谬误发生在结论已被预设在前提出中——“我们知道《圣经》是真实的，因为《圣经》上这么说。”
A straw man fallacy distorts an opponent’s position to make it easier to attack. A false dilemma presents only two options when more exist. The naturalistic fallacy, identified by G.E. Moore, illicitly derives an ‘ought’ from an ‘is’, moving from a factual description to a moral prescription without justification.
稻草人谬误歪曲对手的立场，使其更易攻击。假两难谬误在存在更多选项时只呈现两个选项。摩尔指出的自然主义谬误非法地从“是”推出“应当”，在没有辩护的情况下从事实描述跳跃到道德规定。
Memory slogan: ‘Ad hominem attacks the man, straw man attacks a fake argument, begging the question chases its own tail.’
记忆口号：“人身攻击谬误攻击人，稻草人谬误攻击假观点，乞题谬误追咬自己的尾巴。”
Published by TutorHao | Philosophy Revision Series | aleveler.com
更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）
屏轩国际教育cambridge primary/secondary checkpoint, cat4, ukiset,ukcat,igcse,alevel,PAT,STEP,MAT, ibdp,ap,ssat,sat,sat2课程辅导，国外大学本科硕士研究生博士课程论文辅导