📚 A-Level CAIE Philosophy: Glossary and Mnemonics Quick Revision Guide | A-Level CAIE 哲学：词汇术语速记指南
CAIE A-Level Philosophy (9696) rewards precise technical language. This guide covers the key terms you are most likely to need in Papers 1 and 2, organised by theme and linked to the philosophers, arguments and objections that examiners expect.
CAIE A-Level 哲学(9696)奖励准确的技术语言。本指南按主题整理了你在试卷 1 和试卷 2 中最可能用到的关键术语，并把它们与考官期望看到的哲学家、论证和反驳联系起来。
1. Why Terminology Matters in CAIE Philosophy | 为何术语在 CAIE 哲学中重要
In CAIE A-Level Philosophy, examiners reward precise use of technical vocabulary. Terms such as ‘a priori’, ‘utility’ or ‘synthetic’ are not decorative; they mark distinctions between arguments. Using them accurately shows AO1 understanding, while a vague paraphrase often loses marks.
在 CAIE A-Level 哲学中，考官奖励准确使用专业术语。’a priori’、’utility’ 或 ‘synthetic’ 等术语不是装饰，而是区别不同论证的标志。准确使用它们可以体现 AO1 的理解，而含糊转述常常丢分。
A glossary becomes a revision tool only when each term is linked to a specific philosopher, argument or objection. Do not memorise definitions in isolation; instead, build short chains such as ‘justified true belief’ leads to ‘Gettier cases’ leads to ‘no false lemmas’.
只有把每个术语与特定的哲学家、论证或反驳联系起来，词汇表才能成为复习工具。不要孤立地背诵定义；相反，要建立短链条，例如 ‘justified true belief’ 引出 ‘Gettier cases’，再引出 ‘no false lemmas’。
2. Epistemology: Knowledge, Belief and Justification | 认识论：知识、信念与辩护
Epistemology asks what it means to know. The classic starting point is justified true belief (JTB): S knows that p if and only if S believes p, p is true, and S is justified in believing p. Mnemonic: ‘Just Trust the Basics’ for Justified, True, Belief.
认识论探讨’知道’意味着什么。经典起点是得到辩护的真信念(JTB)：S 知道 p，当且仅当 S 相信 p，p 为真，并且 S 有理由相信 p。记忆口诀：’Just Trust the Basics’ 对应 Justified、True、Belief。
Gettier counterexamples show that JTB is not sufficient. A person can have a justified true belief that rests on a false assumption or lucky accident. Candidates should be ready to define ‘necessary’ and ‘sufficient’ conditions, because exam questions often ask whether certainty is necessary for knowledge.
盖梯尔反例表明 JTB 不是充分条件。一个人可以拥有基于错误假设或运气巧合的得到辩护的真信念。考生应能定义’必要条件’和’充分条件’，因为考题常问确定性是否是知识的必要条件。
Distinguish propositional knowledge (‘knowing that’) from ability knowledge (‘knowing how’) and acquaintance knowledge (‘knowing of’). In exams, clarity here prevents category mistakes.
区分命题知识(‘knowing that’)、能力知识(‘knowing how’)与亲知知识(‘knowing of’)。在考试中，这种区分可以避免范畴错误。
3. Scepticism and Perception | 怀疑论与知觉
Global scepticism doubts all knowledge; local scepticism targets a specific domain, such as other minds or the external world. Descartes’s method of doubt is a controlled global scepticism used to find indubitable foundations.
全面怀疑论怀疑所有知识；局部怀疑论只针对特定领域，例如他心或外部世界。笛卡尔的怀疑方法是受控的全面怀疑，用来寻找不可怀疑的基础。
In perception, direct realism says we immediately perceive mind-independent objects. Indirect realism says we perceive sense-data, which are caused by external objects but are not identical to them. Mnemonic: ‘Direct sees the table; indirect sees the table-image.’
在知觉方面，直接实在论认为我们直接知觉到独立于心灵的对象。间接实在论认为我们知觉的是感觉材料，它们由外部对象引起但不等于外部对象。口诀：’直接看到桌子；间接看到桌子的表象’。
Key objections include illusion, hallucination and the time-lag argument. These support a sense-data vocabulary but invite the ‘veil of perception’ problem: if we only know sense-data, how can we know the world beyond them?
关键反驳包括错觉、幻觉和时间延迟论证。这些论证支持感觉材料术语，但也带来’知觉之幕’问题：如果我们只知道感觉材料，又如何知道材料之外的世界？
4. Moral Philosophy: Consequentialism and Utilitarianism | 道德哲学：结果论与功利主义
Consequentialism judges the rightness of an action solely by its outcomes. Utilitarianism is the best-known version: the right action maximises utility. Bentham’s classical utilitarianism equates utility with pleasure minus pain, a hedonistic calculus.
结果论只根据行为的结果来判断其正当性。功利主义是最著名的版本：正当行为最大化功利。边沁的古典功利主义把功利等同于快乐减去痛苦，是一种享乐主义的计算。
Mill distinguishes higher and lower pleasures. Mnemonic: ‘Socrates dissatisfied beats a satisfied pig’. This phrase captures his claim that intellectual pleasures are qualitatively superior, not merely quantitatively greater.
密尔区分高级快乐和低级快乐。口诀：’不满足的苏格拉底胜过满足的猪’。这句话体现他的主张：理智快乐在性质上更高，而不只是数量上更大。
Act utilitarianism applies the utility principle to each individual act. Rule utilitarianism applies it to general rules, such as ‘do not lie’. Rule utilitarianism can avoid some injustice objections because it does not allow a single lie solely because it produces a small local gain.
行为功利主义把功利原则运用于每一个具体行为。规则功利主义把功利原则运用于一般规则，例如’不说谎’。规则功利主义能避免一些不公正的反驳，因为它不允许仅仅因为某个谎言带来微小的局部利益就说谎。
5. Deontology and Virtue Ethics | 义务论与美德伦理学
Deontology says the right action is not determined by consequences but by duty and rational principle. Kant’s categorical imperative commands unconditionally, unlike a hypothetical imperative, which says ‘if you want Y, do X’.
义务论认为正当行为不是由后果决定，而是由义务和理性原则决定。康德的定言命令是无条件地命令，不同于假言命令——假言命令说’如果你想要 Y，就做 X’。
Kant’s first formulation: act only on that maxim that you can will as a universal law. Mnemonic: ‘Universalise your rule before you act.’ The second formulation treats persons as ends, never merely as means, and the third imagines a kingdom of ends.
康德的第一表述：只按照你能够同时愿意它成为普遍法则的准则行动。口诀：’行动前先普遍化你的规则’。第二表述把人当作目的，而绝不仅仅当作手段；第三表述设想一个目的王国。
Virtue ethics shifts from ‘what should I do?’ to ‘what kind of person should I be?’ Aristotle’s eudaimonia is flourishing or the life of rational virtue. Phronesis is practical wisdom, the ability to judge the mean relative to the situation.
美德伦理学把问题从’我该做什么？’转向’我应该成为什么样的人？’亚里士多德的 eudaimonia 是繁荣或合乎理性美德的生活。Phronesis 是实践智慧，即根据情境判断中道的能力。
6. Meta-Ethics: Cognitivism vs Non-Cognitivism | 元伦理学：认知主义与非
Published by TutorHao | A-Level 哲学 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