Year 12 AQA Philosophy: Formula & Theorem Quick Revision Handbook | Year 12 AQA 哲学：公式定理速查手册

📚 Year 12 AQA Philosophy: Formula & Theorem Quick Revision Handbook | Year 12 AQA 哲学：公式定理速查手册

In Year 12 AQA Philosophy, you are required to master a range of definitions, argument structures, and ethical principles. This revision handbook compiles the key ‘formulae’ and ‘theorems’ — from the tripartite definition of knowledge to Kant’s categorical imperative — enabling you to quickly recall and apply them in exam essays.

在 Year 12 AQA 哲学课程中，你需要掌握一系列定义、论证结构和伦理原则。本速查手册汇总了核心的“公式”和“定理”——从知识的三分定义到康德的绝对命令——帮助你在考试论文中快速回忆并运用它们。

1. The JTB Model of Knowledge | 知识的三分模型 (JTB)

The tripartite analysis, inherited from Plato, defines knowledge as justified true belief. Each condition is seen as individually necessary: a belief cannot count as knowledge if it is false, if the subject does not hold it, or if it lacks adequate grounds.

源自柏拉图的三分分析将知识界定为得到辩护的真信念。每个条件都被视为单独必要的：如果信念为假、主体并不持有它、或者缺乏充分的根据，它就不能算作知识。

S knows that p =def (i) p is true; (ii) S believes that p; (iii) S has adequate justification for p.

Together, these three conditions are supposed to be jointly sufficient. If a belief is true, held by the subject, and supported by good evidence or reasons, the subject is credited with knowledge. This model therefore offers a universal template for analysing knowledge claims in everyday and scientific contexts.

这三个条件合在一起应当构成充分条件。如果一个信念是真的，被主体持有，并且得到良好的证据或理由支持，该主体就被认为拥有知识。因此，这一模型为分析日常和科学语境中的知识主张提供了一个通用模板。

2. Gettier’s Challenge: The Standard Counterexample | 葛梯尔的挑战：标准反例

Gettier cases show that justified true belief does not guarantee knowledge. The classic structure involves a justified but false proposition that leads to a true belief by luck. A typical scenario: Smith has strong evidence that Jones owns a Ford, so he justifiably believes ‘Jones owns a Ford’. From this he deduces the disjunction ‘Either Jones owns a Ford or Brown is in Barcelona’, where Brown’s location is unknown. It turns out Jones does not own a Ford, but by sheer coincidence Brown is in Barcelona.

葛梯尔案例表明，得到辩护的真信念并不保证知识。经典结构包含一个有辩护但错误的命题，由运气导致一个真信念。典型场景：史密斯有充分证据相信“琼斯拥有一辆福特”，于是他通过有辩护的方式推导出选言命题“要么琼斯有一辆福特，要么布朗在巴塞罗那”，而布朗的位置未知。结果琼斯并没有福特，但纯属巧合，布朗恰好在巴塞罗那。

Gettier formula: S has a justified false belief that q; S validly deduces p from q; p is true. Thus S has JTB for p without knowledge, because the truth of p depends on accident, not justification.

This structure reveals a gap between justification and truth. Because the chain of justification rests on a false lemma, the resulting true belief is mere epistemic luck. All post-Gettier accounts of knowledge attempt to close this gap.

这一结构揭示了辩护与真之间的鸿沟。由于辩护链条建立在一个假前提之上，由此产生的真信念仅仅是认知运气。所有后葛梯尔的知识解释都试图弥合这一鸿沟。

3. Reliabilism as a Post-Gettier Solution | 后葛梯尔方案：可靠主义

Reliabilism replaces the justification condition with the requirement that the belief be produced by a reliable cognitive process. Reliability is a tendency to yield true beliefs rather than false ones. For example, normal visual perception under good lighting is a reliable process.

可靠主义将辩护条件替换为要求信念是由可靠的认知过程产生的。可靠性指倾向于产生真信念而非假信念。例如，在良好光线下正常视觉感知就是一个可靠的过程。

S knows that p iff (i) p is true; (ii) S believes that p; (iii) S’s belief that p is produced by a reliable belief-forming process.

This account handles Gettier-style cases because the accidental truth of the belief is not creditable to a reliable process. In the Ford case, Smith’s disjunction is not produced by a process that reliably tracks the truth about Brown’s whereabouts; it is a lucky inference. Reliabilism thus severs the link between justification and false lemmas.

这一解释处理了葛梯尔式案例，因为信念的偶然真值不能归功于可靠过程。在福特案例中，史密斯的选言命题并非由可靠地追踪布朗位置真相的过程产生；它是一个幸运的推论。因此，可靠主义切断了辩护与假前提之间的联结。

A

Published by TutorHao | Year 12 哲学 Revision Series | aleveler.com

更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）