听说过奥数,没听过“奥哲”?历年真题了解一下

很多人听说过奥数,却对“奥哲”知之甚少。

据文汇报报道,前两天,国际哲学奥林匹克竞赛(IPO,以下简称“奥哲”)上海项目组委会正式成立,这在我国尚属首次。

根据合作协议,此次组委会由上海市校外教育协会等四方合作组成,针对哲学有兴趣的高中学生开展相关活动,包括在高中生中开展基于“奥哲”的学生哲学社团、哲学IP、哲学课程建设、师生课程培训、夏冬令营集训、参加区域及国际赛事学生选拔等。

500

国际哲学奥林匹克竞赛上海项目组委会正式成立

设立于1993年的“奥哲”是一项面向高中生的哲学竞赛,由联合国教科文组织(UNESCO)支持,国际哲学团体联合会(FISP)主办,至今已举办过25届。

作为一项国际人文学科竞赛,奥哲的竞赛规则与其他学科竞赛基本相同:

参赛国家可派出两名参赛学生,主办国可派出十名参赛学生;竞赛时间一般为四至五天,参赛者需从四个题目选择其一,并在四小时内以英文、法文、德文或西班牙文作论文一篇,但不能是其母语或本国的官方语言。最终,论文将由随队导师和国际哲学团体联合会的代表共同评核,决出金奖、银奖、铜奖、优异奖。

长期以来,中国高中生对这项国际赛事的了解和关注并不多,此前也并无官方组织管理。迄今为止,参加过“奥哲”的中国学生只有四届六人

但近年来,“奥哲”在国内的关注度正在逐渐提升,去年第25届“奥哲”在荷兰鹿特丹举行,便有两名中国高二学生参赛,一位来自上海,一位正在美国求学,最后在90多名参赛者中,他们分别位列30多名、50多名。如今,这位来自上海的学生今年已被美国排名前20的爱默里大学录取。

第26届“奥哲”将于今年5月在欧洲黑山共和国举行,目前国内自由报名学生已达20至30人。

附历年真题(中文版)

500

1993年

与风物景色相较,家乡更是一种心智情感状态。(巴什拉)

孩童是历史悠久、存续至今的古物。(巴什拉)

我们所见的每样东西都可能与我们所见的不同。(维特根斯坦)

没有“当前眼下”就不会有时间;没有时间就不会有“当前眼下”。(亚里士多德)

1995年

每个人都是一个别的、跟他自己不同的人,没有人是他自己。(海德格尔)

实际上,要认为我们自己不存在是不可能的。(乌纳穆诺)

我们是否应该立足于这样一个前提:无论在何种情形下,一个人都不允许做不公正的事;或者,我们是否应该认为不公正的事在某些情形下是被允许的?(柏拉图)

做一个哲学家意味着无时无刻都在旅行;哲学中的问题比这些问题的答案对哲学更加不可或缺。(雅斯贝尔斯)

1996年

没有什么是千真万确的,任何事情都有发生的可能。(尼采)

这个世界的邪恶总是源于无知;如果不是被赋予知识和洞察力,善意可以导致与恶意所导致的等量的伤害。(加缪)

你语言的界限就是你生活现实的界限。(维特根斯坦)

那么请依此行动:把你自身的人性,以及所有其他人身上的人性作为一种目的,而永远不要作为一种手段来对待。(康德)

1997年

哲学是一种科学吗?

没有强制力的公义是无能为力的;缺乏公义的强制力是暴虐的、压迫性的。(帕斯卡尔)

为真理本身而寻求真理,这样的观点在我们实用主义者看来难以理解。我们研究一件事,其目的不能被看做是为了发现真理。相反,其目的是为了人们能达成一致——关于该做什么,想要达到什么结果,以及藉什么手段达到这些结果。……我们能对事物作出的描述都是与我们的目的性相一致的。……我们 所必须知晓的只是是否存在与这种描述相抵牾的、对实现我们的目的更有用的描述。(理查德·罗蒂,《相对主义:发现与发明》)

1999年

我们不可能构想出哪怕一件东西是本身为善,而不需要任何界定的。在这个世界,或者即使在这个世界之外,我们都不可能构想出哪怕一件这样的东西。只除了善意。(康德)

欲望是人之为人的本质(斯宾诺莎)

我们所称之为“规律”的都是假设或猜测,这些假设或猜测总是某个更大的理论体系的一部分,因此,它们永远都不能孤立地被证实为真或为伪。(卡尔·波普尔)

知识是力量吗?

2000年

时间不是某种自足自主存在的东西……因此,时间是一种属于(人类)直觉的、纯粹主观的状态……离开了主体,时间什么都不是。(康德,《纯粹理性批判》)

从自然状态过渡到文明社会,这个过程在人身上导致了一种重要变化;它把公正作为一种行为法则,来替代本能的位置,这赋予人的行为一种前所未有的道德性质。(卢梭,《社会契约论》)

从单细胞变形虫到人类这样一个过程,在哲学家眼中显然是一种进步——虽然我们无法获知单细胞变形虫是否会同意这种看法。(罗素)

所有人类依其本性都渴望知识。(亚里士多德,《形而上学》)

2001年

良知的法则从习俗而来,我们虚伪地宣称它们得自于天性。(蒙田,《随笔集》)

如果我们把无限制的宽容延展,使它甚至适用于那些不宽容的人;如果我们不做好准备对抗不宽容者的攻击,维护一个宽容的社会,那么,宽容者将被消灭,随之宽容也被消灭。(卡尔·波普尔,《开放社会及其敌人》)

我只须问我自己我想要做什么,每样我凭感觉认为好的就是好的,每样我凭感觉认为坏的就是坏的……(卢梭)。

由此,显而易见,当没有一种势力涉及到所有人,使他们全都心存敬畏,他们就处于那种被称之为战争的状态;在这种状态中,人人彼此为敌。(霍布斯,《利维坦》)

2002年

那么,你想要我们对我们先前对公正的人所下的定义加一个补充。我们先前说,对朋友行善举,对敌人行恶事,这样是公正的;可是现在,我们要加上说:如果朋友是好人,对他行善举是公正的,如果敌人是坏人,对他行恶事是公正的? (柏拉图,《理想国》)

那些不能牢记过去的人注定会使过去重复发生。(乔治·桑塔耶拿,《理性生活》)

但是,要能够说一个点是黑色或白色,我必须首先知道在什么条件下,一个点被称作白色或黑色;为了能够说:“p”为真(或为伪),我必须确切知道在什么条件下,我称“p”为真,并由此来确定这个提议的意思。(维特根斯坦,《逻辑哲学论》)

这是又一个吊诡命题,但作为真实的绝对存在,上帝必须也是撒旦。只有这样,上帝才能被称为是真的全知全能。……绝对性的上帝必须在其自身中包含全然否定,必须是那个陷入终极的恶的上帝。(西田几多郎,《虚无和宗教的世界观》)

2003年

良知的法则从习俗而来,我们虚伪地宣称它们得自于天性。(蒙田,《随笔集》)

关于公共领域的和平在哪些条件下之为可能,哲学家提出了相关定理;为从事战争而装备起来的城邦应该参照这些定理来吸取信息和得到指导。(康德,《永久和平论》)

我们能在自己身上察觉到这种进攻性,我们有充分理由假定其他人[也]有这种进攻性;这种进攻性影响我们与邻居的关系,使人类文明别无选择,而必须付出如此高昂的能量消耗。这种与生俱来的、人与人之间的相互敌视使文明社会无时不处在解体的威胁下。(佛洛依德,《文明及其缺憾》)

2004年

常识所用来反对自由的一个重要观点在于它提醒我们一无所能。我们做不到随心所欲地改变我们的境况;正相反,我们似乎连我们自己都没有能力改变。我不是自由的——连逃脱我的阶级、国家、家庭对我的命定,我都不是自由的;积攒我自己的力量或运道,我也不是自由的;克服最微不足道的口腹之欲或习惯,我也不是自由的。(萨特,《存在与虚无》)

必须批判地反思对真理的希求——让我们这样来定义我们所要做的:这一次,真理的价值必须经由实验而受到质疑……(尼采,《论道德的谱系》)

事实上,历史不属于我们,而是我们属于历史。(汉斯-格奥尔格·伽达默尔,《真理与方法》)

科学需要哲学吗?

2005年

如果我必须在背叛我的国家和背叛朋友之间做选择,我希望我该拥有背叛我的国家的勇气。(爱德华·摩根·福斯特)

当今,真理分散在很多话语体系中,这些话语体系不再能被安排成一种高下的等级关系。然而,在任何一个这样的话语中,我们都在顽强地寻找能够说服所有人的卓识和洞见。(尤尔根·哈贝马斯)

享乐主义、悲观主义、实用主义、快乐说——在估量事物价值的时候,这些体系都考虑到伴随这些事物而来的快感或痛感,那就是说,这些体系所依照的是所有那些非核心的条件或事实,[由此]它们被看做不够深刻、天真幼稚。任何具有建设性的心智情感的人,任何具有艺术家良知的人,都只能带着反讽和悲悯,在一定距离之外来看这种现象。(尼采)

语言是一个诸多路径的迷宫。从一个方向来,你知道路;从另一个方向来到同一个地方,你就不再知道路了。(维特根斯坦)

2006年

要了解一样东西,我们必须爱它;要爱一样东西,我们必须了解它。(西田几多郎)

在很多情况下——虽然不是在所有情况下——我们所使用的“意义”一词可以这样定义:一个词的意义是它在语言中的用法。(维特根斯坦)

哲学家们只是用不同的方式解释世界,问题在于改变世界。(马克思)

简而言之,人的行为从来不是自由的;它们总是他的脾性所导致的必然结果、他所接受的观点导致的必然结果;也是那些或真或伪的概念导致的必然结果——他依仗这些概念来理解快乐;也是他所持有的意见导致的必然结果,这些意见被榜样、教育、日常经验所强化。(霍尔巴赫)

2007年

从以上解释可以作出如下推论,作为国家的基础,政府治理的终极目的不是用恐惧去统治、或者限制人们,也不是强求人们服从,而是正相反,其终极目的是每个人都从恐惧中解脱,那就是说,在所有可能的方面,每个人都生活在安全中;换而言之,就是强化他生存和工作的自然权利。(斯宾诺莎,《神学政治论》)

有两样东西使我脑中充满了永远簇新的、不断增强的仰慕和敬畏——我头顶的星空和我心中的道德律法。(康德,《实践理性批判》)

空间不是主体,存在于空间中的世界也不是主体。(海德格尔,《存在与时间》)

因此,公正被看作是所有德行中最高的,……就像那句格言所说,“在公正中,所有美德都被总和起来了。”它是完满的德行和极致的卓越,因为它是完满德行的实际运用。它是完满的,因为拥有它的人不但能够自己运用他的德行,而且能在他与其他人的关系中运用它。(亚里士多德,《尼各马可伦理学》)

2008年

身份和身体是同一的吗?

在民主体制中,人们似乎可以为所欲为——这是真的;但政治自由根本不在于为所欲为。(孟德斯鸠,《论法的精神》)

没有一种势力涉及到所有人,这样的地方就没有律法;没有律法的地方,就没有不公正。(霍布斯,《利维坦》)

当其他人的行为和生活跟他所认为的正当相抵牾的时候,一个自由的人必须能容忍这种情况。他必须使自己摆脱这样一种习惯,那就是只要有什么事不让他感到快活,他就马上叫警察。(米塞斯,《古典传统中的自由主义(自由与繁荣的国度)》)

2009年

I.“那么,如果我们所做的事有某种目的,而我们只为了这目的本身而期望达到这个目的(我们所期望的所有其他都是为了这个目的);如果我们选择一样东西,我们的选择是为了这个东西本身,而不是其他别的什么(如果是为了其他别的什么,那么,这个过程就会无限延续,我们欲望就会变得空虚、无结果),显然,这肯 定是善,最高的善。”(亚里士多德,《尼各马可伦理学》)

II.“依照理性,只有一种办法能使相互关联的城邦出离这种无法无天的状态,这种状态只会导致战争;这办法就是:像人类个体一样,这些城邦放弃他们野蛮未开化(无法无天)的自由,使它们自己适应于大家共同遵守的、强制性的律法;由此形成一种(总在增长的)诸多国家共存的状态,这种状态最终将会囊括世界上所有的国家。”(康德,《永久和平论》)

III.要成为艺术品,一件艺术品必须是美的吗?或者说,一件艺术品可不可以也是丑的?如果第二种情况是可能的,为什么我们要对这样一件艺术品感兴趣?

IV.不仅上帝的存在令人生疑,而且有关上帝的理念如此紧致连贯也令人生疑。

(2011-2017的题目只有英文版,值得注意的是,出现了孔子、庄子等中国哲学家

2011年

1.

“He who learns but does not think is lost; he who thinks but does not learn is in danger.”

Confucius, Analects 2.15.

2.

“To a wise man the whole world is open. For the whole cosmos is the fatherland of a good soul.”

3.

“Thus the distinct boundaries and offices of reason andof taste are easily ascertained.   The former conveys the knowledge of truth and falsehood: thelatter gives the sentiment of beauty and deformity, vice and virtue. The one discoversobjects as they really stand in nature, without addition or diminution: the other has aproductive faculty, and gilding or staining all natural objects with the colours, borrowedfrom internal sentiment, raises in a manner a new creation…”

David Hume, An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals(1751).

4.

“Art is not a copy of the real world. One of the damn things is enough.”

Nelson Goodman, Languages of Art  (1976).

2012

1.

“Beauty does not manifest itself, but is revealed by man.If Lin Tang (orchid pavilion) and its clear river and slender bamboo had not been described by Wang Xizhi (303-361), they would have disappeared in deserted mountains without being known.”

Liu Zongyuan (773-819).

2.

“The sad truth is that most evil is done by people who never make up their minds to be good or evil.”

Hannah Arendt, The Life of the Mind (1978).

3.

“If [an animal] suffers, there can be no moral justification fordisregarding that suffering, or for refusing to count it equally with the likesuffering of any other being. But the converse of this is also true. If a beingis not capable of suffering, or of enjoyment, there is nothing to take intoaccount.”

Peter Singer, Animal Liberation(1975).

4.

“And when we question whether the underlying object is suchas it appears, we grant the fact that it appears, and our doubt does notconcern the appearance itself but the account given of that appearance– and that is a different thing from questioning the appearance itself.For example, honey appears to us to be sweet (and this we grant, for weperceive sweetness through the senses), but whether it is also sweet in itsessence is for us a matter of doubt, since this is not an appearance but ajudgment about the appearance.”

Sextus Empiricus, Outlines of Pyrrhonism I.10 (2nd century AD)

2013

“In the principle that subjectivity, inwardness, is thetruth, there is comprehended the Socratic wisdom, whose everlasting merit itwas to have become aware of the essential significance of existence, of the factthat the knower is an existing individual. For this reason Socrates was in thetruth by virtue of his ignorance in the highest sense in which this waspossible within paganism.”

Søren Kierkegaard, Concluding Unscientific Postscript to the Philosophical Fragments(1846).

“A tragedy, then, is the imitation of a noble and completeaction, having a certain magnitude, made in a language spiced up by diversekinds of embellishment brought in separately in the parts of the work. Thisimitation is achieved through characters, not through narration; and, throughpity and fears, it accomplishes the catharsis of such emotions. By ‘languagespiced up’ I mean a language with rhythm, harmony and song; by ‘kinds ofembellishments brought in separately in the parts of the work’ I mean that someparts are worked out in verse only and others with song.”

Aristotle, Poetics,6, 1449 b 24-28.

“A legally unrestricted majority rule, that is, a democracywithout a constitution, can be very formidable in the suppression of the rightsof minorities and very effective in the suffocation of dissent without any useof violence.”

Hannah Arendt, On Violence (1970).

Zigong asked: “Is there one word that can serve as aprinciple of conduct for life?” Confucius replied, “It is the word shu, or reciprocity:Do not do to others what you do not want them to do to you.”

To what extent may this formulation of the Golden Rule,which can also be found in other cultures throughout history, be considered asa universal moral principle?

Confucius (vi-v century bc), Analects 15.23

2014

I

Choosing to kill the innocent as a means to your ends is alwaysmurder…Killing the innocent, even if you know as a matter of statisticalcertainty that the things you do involve it, is not necessarily murder….On theother hand, unscrupulousness in considering the possibilities turns it intomurder. – G.E.M. Anscombe, “Mr Truman’s Degree”, in her Collected Philosophical Papers,vol. III (Ethics,Religion and Politics), Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,1981, p.66

II

The most tantalizing question of all: If a fake is so expert thateven after the most      thorough and trust worthy examination its authenticity is still open to doubt, is it or is it not as         satisfactory a work of art as if it were unequivocally genuine? – Aline B. Saarinen, New York    Times Book Review, July 30, 1961, p.14; cited in Nelson Goodman, Languages of Art,1976, p.99

III

Knowledge is true belief based on argument. — Plato, Theaetetus, 201 c-d 

 “Is Justified True Belief Knowledge?” — Edmund Gettier, Analysis

IV

Confucius said: “Now I understand why the doctrine of the mean can not be put into    practice. Clever people, knowing it thoroughly, don’t thinkit is practicable, while stupid people,         unable to understand it, donot know how to practice it. I also know why the doctrine of the mean     can not be popularized. Talented people overdo itwhile unskilled people can not do it.” – The        Doctrine ofthe Mean, translated by Fu Yunlong, Beijing 1996, pp. 11-12

 

2015

I.

“The adversaries of philosophical literature argue,rightly, that the signification of a novel or a play, or of a poem for thatmatter, cannot be translated into abstract concepts. Otherwise, why construct afictional apparatus around ideas that one could express more economically andclearly in more direct language? The novel is justified only if it is a mode ofcommunication irreducible to any other. While the philosopher and the essayistgive the reader an intellectual reconstruction of their experience, thenovelist claims to reconstruct on an imaginary plane this experience itself asit appears prior to any elucidation.”  – Philosophical Writings,  p. 270.

II.

“Death and life, survival and perishing, success andfailure, poverty and wealth, superiority and inferiority, disgrace and honor,hunger and thirst, cold and heat–these are the transformations of events, theproceedings of fate. …. So there is no need to let them disrupt our harmony.” –Zhuangzi, 5:15. InBrook Ziporyn, Zhuangzi:the Essential Writings (Hackett, 2009).

III.

“Thoughts are neither things of the external world norrepresentations. A third domain has to be recognized. What belongs to thisdomain has in common with representations the fact that it cannot be perceivedby the senses, but with things the fact that it needs no supporting subject, onthe consciousness of which it depends.”

IV.

Some philosophers and theologians since Plato have claimedthat the human body is a kind of prison of the soul. Michel Foucault hasrecently suggested that “the soul is a prison of the body” (Surveiller et punir,p.34). Consider some of the conceptions and arguments thatmight support these opposing views.

2016

1.“Spoken sounds are symbols of affections in the soul, and written marks symbols of spoken sounds. And just as written marks are not the same for all men, neither are spoken sounds. But what these are in the first place signs of – affections of the soul – are the same for all; and what these affections are likenesses of – actual things – are also the same.”

Aristotle, De Interpretatione, 16 a2.

2.“Now morally practical reason pronounces in us its irresistible veto: There is to be no war, neither war between you and me in the state of nature nor war between us as states, which, although they are internally in a lawful condition, are still externally (in relation to one another) in a lawless condition; for war is not the way in which everyone should seek his rights.”

Immanuel Kant, The Metaphysics of Morals (1795).

3.“One is not born, but rather becomes, a woman.”

Simone de Beauvoir, The Second Sex (1949).

4. “Environment is the moment that objectifies human existence; but by so doing, the human understands him/herself. We can call it self-discovery through one’s environment.”

Tetsuro Watsuji, Fûdo (1935).

2017

1.“Thus no one can act against the sovereign’s decisions without prejudicing his authority, but they can think and judge and consequently also speak without any restriction, provided they merely speak or teach by way of reason alone, not by trickery or in anger or from hatred or with the intention of introducing some alteration in the state on their own initiative.”

Baruch Spinoza, Theological-Political Treatise (1670).

2. “Universal toleration becomes questionable when its rationale no longer prevails, when tolerance is administered to manipulated and indoctrinated individuals who parrot, as their own, the opinion of their masters, for whom heteronomy has become autonomy.”

Herbert Marcuse, Repressive Tolerance (1965).

3. “In a technological age public professional interaction requires neutrality of thought for effective collaboration and political coexistence. As an administrative attitude neutrality differs from tolerance which is an ethical virtue; but neutrality in the professional sphere is implied and included within the ethical virtue of tolerance. Note that this objective modification of the virtue of tolerance, from patience in regard to other persons’ defective acts to permission of different types of activity, is an objective modification of virtue in our technological society.”

Tomonobu Imamichi, “The Concept of an Eco-ethics and the Development of Moral Thought” (1989)

4. “Another problem with people who fail to examine themselves is that they often prove all too easily influenced. When a talented demagogue addressed the Athenians with moving rhetoric but bad arguments, they were all too ready to be swayed, without ever examining the argument.”

Martha C. Nussbaum, Not for Profit: Why Democracy Needs the Humanities (2010).

 (来源:文汇报等)

全部专栏