📚 SQA Year 10 Philosophy: Mock Unit Test Analysis | SQA 十年级哲学：单元测试模拟卷解析
Welcome to this detailed walkthrough of a mock unit test for Year 10 SQA Philosophy. We'll analyse common question types, clarify key concepts, and provide model responses to help you boost your confidence and exam technique.
欢迎阅读这篇 SQA 十年级哲学单元测试模拟卷的详细解析。我们将分析常见题型，厘清核心概念，并提供范例答案，帮助你增强信心、提升应试技巧。
1. Distinguishing A Priori from A Posteriori Knowledge | 区分先验与后验知识
Question: Which of the following statements is known a priori? A) Gold is heavier than water. B) All bachelors are unmarried. C) Elephants are larger than mice. D) Sugar tastes sweet. (1 mark)
问题：以下哪项陈述属于先验知识？A) 金子比水重。 B) 所有单身汉都是未婚的。 C) 大象比老鼠大。 D) 糖尝起来是甜的。（1分）
Answer: B. 'All bachelors are unmarried' is an analytic truth knowable simply by understanding the words. The other options require sensory experience.
答案：B。“所有单身汉都是未婚的”是一项分析真理，仅凭理解词语即可获知。其他选项都需要感官经验。
Explanation: A priori knowledge is justified independently of experience, often through reason and logic. Analytic statements like B are true by definition.
解释：先验知识的辩护不依赖于经验，常通过理性和逻辑获得。像B这样的分析陈述因其定义而为真。
2. Act and Rule Utilitarianism | 行为功利主义与规则功利主义
Question: Explain one difference between act utilitarianism and rule utilitarianism. (3 marks)
问题：解释行为功利主义与规则功利主义的一点区别。（3分）
Model Answer: Act utilitarianism judges each individual action by its consequences, aiming to maximise happiness in that specific case. Rule utilitarianism, by contrast, follows general rules that tend to produce the greatest happiness if adopted universally.
标准答案：行为功利主义以每个具体行为的结果来评判，旨在该特定情形下最大化幸福。相反，规则功利主义遵循那些若被普遍采用就会带来最大幸福的普遍规则。
In act utilitarianism, a person might lie if it produces more good in one situation; a rule utilitarian would likely oppose lying because a rule against lying promotes overall well-being.
在行为功利主义中，如果撒谎在某个情境下带来更多益处，人可能撒谎；而规则功利主义者很可能反对撒谎，因为禁止撒谎的规则能促进整体福祉。
3. The Teleological Argument | 目的论论证
Question: Describe William Paley's watchmaker analogy as part of the teleological argument. (4 marks)
问题：描述威廉·佩利的手表匠类比，作为目的论论证的一部分。（4分）
Model Answer: Paley argued that if you found a watch on a heath, its complexity and purposeful arrangement of parts would lead you to infer an intelligent watchmaker. Similarly, the complexity and order of the natural world, such as the human eye, indicate an intelligent designer — God.
标准答案：佩利认为，假如你在荒野上发现一块手表，其复杂性和零件的有序排列会让你推断存在一位智慧的手表匠。同样，自然界（如人眼）的复杂性和秩序表明有一位智慧的设计者——上帝。
The analogy is based on the idea that design-like features require a designer. This is an a posteriori argument drawing from observation of the world.
该类比基于这样的观念：具有设计特征的事物需要一位设计者。这是一种从观察世界出发的后验论证。
4. Criticisms of the Design Argument | 对设计论证的批评
Question: Outline one criticism of the design argument. (3 marks)
问题：概述对设计论证的一个批评。（3分）
Model Answer: David Hume argued that the analogy between the universe and a machine is weak. We have no experience of universe-making, so we cannot legitimately compare the universe to human artefacts. The universe might be more like a living organism that grows rather than a machine that is built.
标准答案：大卫·休谟指出，宇宙与机器之间的类比是脆弱的。我们没有宇宙制造的经验，因此不能合理地将宇宙与人造物相比。宇宙可能更像一个有机生长的生命体，而非被建造的机器。
Furthermore, even if a designer were inferred, the argument does not prove the designer is the God of classical theism; it could be multiple gods or an imperfect being.
此外，即使推断出一位设计者，该论证也无法证明这位设计者就是古典有神论的上帝；它可能是多位神祇或一个不完美的存在。
5. Kant's Categorical Imperative | 康德的绝对命令
Question: Using Kant's first formulation of the categorical imperative, explain why lying to save a friend from a murderer might be considered morally wrong. (4 marks)
问题：运用康德绝对命令的第一条表述，解释为什么向凶手撒谎来拯救朋友在道德上可能被认为是错误的。（4分）
Model Answer: The first formulation states: 'Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.' If everyone lied whenever it seemed convenient, trust would collapse and the institution of truth-telling would be undermined. Therefore, lying cannot be universalised and is morally impermissible, even to save a life.
标准答案：第一条表述是：“只按照你同时能够愿意它成为一条普遍法则的准则去行动。”如果每个人在看似便利时都说谎，信任将崩溃，说真话的机制将被摧毁。因此，撒谎不能被普遍化，在道德上是不被允许的，即便为了拯救生命也是如此。
Kantian ethics focuses on the motive and the principle behind the act, not on consequences; thus the good outcome does not justify the lie.
康德伦理学关注行为背后的动机和原则，而非结果；因此善好的结果并不能为谎言辩护。
6. The Ring of Gyges | 盖吉斯之戒
Question: What ethical theory does the Ring of Gyges thought experiment challenge, and how? (3 marks)
问题：盖吉斯之戒的思想实验挑战了哪种伦理理论，又是如何挑战的？（3分）
Model Answer: The story of the Ring of Gyges, found in Plato's Republic, challenges the view that people are just because it is good in itself. Glaucon argues that anyone who possessed a ring making them invisible would act unjustly, proving that justice is only practised unwillingly and for fear of consequences. This is a challenge to moral theories that claim virtue is its own reward, such as virtue ethics.
标准答案：盖吉斯之戒的故事见于柏拉图的《理想国》，它挑战了人们因正义本身为善而行正义的观点。格劳孔论证说，任何拥有能让自己隐身的戒指的人都会行不义之事，这证明了正义仅出于对后果的畏惧而被勉强遵从。这是对声称美德本身就是回报的道德理论（如美德伦理学）的挑战。
It suggests that without external sanctions, moral behaviour would dissolve, undermining the idea of intrinsic moral motivation.
它表明如果没有外在制裁，道德行为将瓦解，从而削弱了内在道德动机的观念。
7. Hard Determinism | 硬决定论
Question: What is hard determinism, and why is it incompatible with free will? (3 marks)
问题：什么是硬决定论，它为何与自由意志不相容？（3分）
Model Answer: Hard determinism is the view that all events, including human actions, are causally determined by prior states and natural laws. Since our choices are the inevitable result of antecedent factors, we cannot have free will in the sense required for moral responsibility.
标准答案：硬决定论认为所有事件，包括人类行为，都由先前的状态和自然法则必然地决定。由于我们的选择是前因的不可避免的结果，我们无法拥有道德责任所需的那种自由意志。
Hard determinists deny libertarian free will; they see the feeling of freedom as an illusion. Compatibilism, by contrast, tries to reconcile determinism and free will.
硬决定论者否定意志自由论的自由；他们认为自由感是一种错觉。相比之下，相容论试图调和决定论与自由意志。
8. Identifying the False Dilemma Fallacy | 识别假两难谬误
Question: Name and explain the informal fallacy in the following argument: 'Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists.' (2 marks)
问题：指出并解释以下论证中的非形式谬误：“你要么支持我们，要么就是支持恐怖分子。”（2分）
Model Answer: This is a false dilemma (or false dichotomy). It presents only two extreme options while ignoring other possibilities, such as opposing terrorism but also criticising certain policies.
标准答案：这是假两难谬误（或虚假二分）。它只呈现两个极端选项，却忽略了其他可能，例如反对恐怖主义但也批评某些政策。
Recognising fallacies like this is essential for evaluating philosophical arguments and resisting manipulative rhetoric.
识别此类谬误对于评估哲学论证和抵制操纵性修辞至关重要。
9. Moral Absolutism versus Relativism | 道德绝对主义与相对主义
Question: Compare moral absolutism and cultural relativism by stating one key difference. (3 marks)
问题：通过陈述一个关键区别，比较道德绝对主义和文化相对主义。（3分）
Model Answer: Moral absolutism holds that certain moral rules are universally valid, independent of culture or individual opinion. Cultural relativism claims that moral truths are determined by the norms of each society and therefore vary across cultures. Thus, an absolutist would say slavery is wrong everywhere, whereas a relativist might say its morality depends on the culture.
标准答案：道德绝对主义认为某些道德规则是普遍有效的，独立于文化或个人观点。文化相对主义则主张道德真理由各个社会的规范决定，因此随文化而异。因此，绝对
Published by TutorHao | Year 10 哲学 Revision Series | aleveler.com
更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）
或截图后用「扫一扫 → 相册」选择本图