📚 Year 13 WJEC Philosophy: A Quick Memory Guide to Key Terms | WJEC 哲学：词汇术语速记指南
Mastering philosophy at Year 13 means building a confident command of technical vocabulary. This guide groups essential WJEC terms into memorable clusters, using mnemonics, contrasts and real-example links to help you recall definitions swiftly under exam conditions.
掌握 Year 13 哲学需要建立对专业术语的自信运用。本指南将 WJEC 必考的核心术语分组为易记的对比群，运用助记法、对比联系和真题示例，帮助你在考试中快速准确回忆定义。
1. What Are Key Philosophical Terms? | 什么是哲学术语？
In WJEC Philosophy, a ‘key term’ is a concept that carries a precise technical meaning, often distinct from everyday usage. These terms act as tools for analysing arguments about God, mind, ethics and free will. Learning them is not about memorising a dictionary but about seeing how each term positions a thinker within a debate.
在 WJEC 哲学中，“关键术语”是指具有精确技术含义的概念，通常与日常用法不同。这些术语是分析关于上帝、心灵、伦理和自由意志等论证的工具。学习它们不是背诵词典，而是看清每个术语如何将思想家定位于一场争论之中。
2. A Priori vs A Posteriori | 先验与后验
‘A priori’ knowledge is justified independently of sense experience – for example, ‘2 + 2 = 4’. ‘A posteriori’ knowledge depends on experience or empirical evidence, such as ‘water boils at 100 °C at sea level’. In the Philosophy of Religion, the ontological argument is a priori; the teleological argument is a posteriori.
“先验”知识是独立于感官经验而得到辩护的——例如“2 + 2 = 4”。“后验”知识则依赖于经验或实证证据，例如“水在海平面高度 100 °C 沸腾”。在宗教哲学中，本体论论证是先验论证；目的论论证是后验论证。
| Term | Source of justification | Example argument |
| A priori | Pure reason, no senses | Anselm’s ontological argument |
| A posteriori | Sense experience, observation | Paley’s design argument |
记忆法：A priori 的 “pri” 像 “prime reason”（首要原因），不靠感官。A posteriori 的 “post” 暗示 “after experience”（经验之后）。
3. Analytic vs Synthetic | 分析命题与综合命题
An ‘analytic’ statement is true solely in virtue of the meaning of its words – ‘All bachelors are unmarried’. A ‘synthetic’ statement is true or false depending on how the world is – ‘The bachelor is 28 years old’. Kant argued that ‘God exists’ is not analytic, so the ontological argument fails by treating existence as a predicate.
“分析”命题仅凭词义即为真——“所有单身汉都未婚”。“综合”命题的真假取决于世界的实际情况——“这位单身汉 28 岁”。康德认为“上帝存在”不是分析命题，因此本体论论证因将“存在”当作谓词而失败。
Tip: The ‘synthetic’ statement synthesises a subject with a fact that is not contained in the subject concept. Think ‘syn’ together + ‘thesis’ putting = putting together concept and world.
提示：“综合”命题将主词与一个不包含在主词概念中的事实综合起来。想想 “syn” 一起 + “thesis” 放置 = 将概念与世界放在一起。
4. Necessary vs Contingent | 必然与偶然
A ‘necessary’ truth is one that could not have been false; it holds in all possible worlds – ‘2 + 2 = 4’. A ‘contingent’ truth is one that happens to be true but could have been otherwise – ‘Paris is the capital of France’. In cosmology, the universe is argued to be contingent and therefore requires a necessary being (God) as its explanation.
“必然”真理是不可能为假的真理，它在所有可能世界中都成立——如“2 + 2 = 4”。“偶然”真理是碰巧为真但本来可能为假的真理——“巴黎是法国首都”。在宇宙论论证中，宇宙被论证为偶然的存在，因此需要一个必然的存在（上帝）作为其解释。
Mnemonic: Necessary Never Not true; Contingent Could Change.
记忆法：必然者永不可能不真（Never Not）；偶然者可以改变（Could Change）。
5. Dualism vs Materialism | 二元论与唯物论
‘Substance dualism’ (Descartes) holds that mind and body are two fundamentally different substances: mental substance is non-spatial and thinking; physical substance is extended in space. ‘Materialism’ (or physicalism) claims that mental states are identical with, or supervene upon, brain states. The ‘hard problem of consciousness’ challenges materialism by asking why physical processes should give rise to subjective experience.
“实体二元论”（笛卡尔）主张心灵与身体是两种根本不同的实体：心灵实体是非空间性的、能思的；物理实体是在空间中广延的。“唯物论”（或物理主义）声称心理状态等同于或随附于大脑状态。“意识难题”挑战唯物论，质问物理过程为何会产生主观体验。
- Dualism: two sorts of stuff – think ‘duo’ = two.
- Materialism: one sort of stuff – matter.
- 二元论：两种东西——想想“duo”=二。
- 唯物论：一种东西——物质。
6. Deontology vs Teleology | 义务论与目的论
‘Deontological’ ethics (Greek deon, duty) judges the morality of an action based on rules or duties, regardless of consequences. Kant is the classic deontologist. ‘Teleological’ ethics (Greek telos, end/purpose) judges actions by the goodness of their outcomes. Utilitarianism is the prime example of a teleological theory.
“义务论”伦理学（希腊语 deon，义务）依据规则或责任判断行为的道德性，而不顾后果。康德是典型的义务论者。“目的论”伦理学（希腊语 telos，目的）凭借结果的好坏来判断行为。功利主义是目的论理论的典型例子。
Memory aid: Deontology = Duty-defined. Teleology = Target (telos) matters.
记忆助手：Deontology = Duty（义务）界定；Teleology = Target/Telos（目的）重要。
7. Ethical Naturalism vs Non-Naturalism | 伦理自然主义与非自然主义
Ethical naturalism claims that moral properties are natural properties. For example, utilitarianism equates ‘good’ with ‘pleasure/happiness’, which can be empirically identified. Ethical non-naturalism (Moore) argues that ‘good’ is a simple, unanalysable, non-natural property – the ‘naturalistic fallacy’ is the mistake of identifying goodness with any natural property.
伦理自然主义主张道德属性即自然属性。例如，功利主义将“善”等同于“快乐/幸福”，这些属性可被经验识别。伦理非自然主义（摩尔）认为“善”是一种简单的、不可分析的非自然属性——“自然主义谬误”就是将善等同于任何自然属性的错误。
Think: Naturalism says moral properties exist in nature; non-naturalism says goodness is sui generis (of its own kind).
思考：自然主义说道德属性存在于自然界中；非自然主义说善是自成一类的。
8. Realism vs Anti-Realism | 实在论与反实在论
In meta-ethics, moral realism says moral facts exist mind-independently. Moral anti-realism denies this. Error theory (Mackie) is anti-realist: moral statements are truth-apt but systematically false. Emotivism (Ayer) is also anti-realist: moral utterances are non-cognitive expressions of feeling, not factual claims. In philosophy of religion, realist interpretations treat ‘God exists’ as a factual claim; anti-realist views treat religious language as expressing attitudes or a ‘form of life’ (Wittgenstein).
在元伦理学中，道德实在论主张道德事实独立于心灵而存在。道德反实在论否认这一点。错误论（麦基）是反实在论：道德陈述具有真值能力，但系统性地为假。情绪主义（艾耶尔）也是反实在论：道德话语是非认知性的情感表达，而非事实陈述。在宗教哲学中，实在论解释将“上帝存在”视为事实性主张；反实在论观点将宗教语言视为表达态度或“生活形式”（维特根斯坦）。
Key distinction: realism = ‘mind-independent truths exist’; anti-realism = ‘truths are constructed or expressions of mind’.
关键区分：实在论 =“独立于心灵的真理存在”；反实在论 =“真理是建构的或心灵的表达”。
9. The Problem of Evil – Key Terms | 恶的问题关键术语
The logical problem of evil claims that the existence of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God is logically incompatible with the existence of evil. The evidential problem grants logical compatibility but argues that the amount and distribution of evil makes God’s existence improbable. Key defences: the ‘free will defence’ (Plantinga) and ‘soul-making theodicy’ (Hick).
恶的逻辑问题主张全能、全善的上帝存在与恶的存在在逻辑上不相容。恶的证据问题承认逻辑相容性，但主张恶的数量与分布使得上帝的存在不太可能。核心辩护：“自由意志辩护”（普兰丁格）与“塑造灵魂神正论”（希克）。
| Logical problem | Inconsistent triad: God’s attributes + evil cannot all coexist. |
| Evidential problem | Gratuitous evil strongly suggests God does not exist. |
| Moral evil | Evil caused by human action (murder, theft). |
| Natural evil | Suffering from natural events (earthquake, disease). |
记忆格言：Logical problem = 不可能；Evidential problem = 不大可能。
10. Free Will – Compatibilism, Libertarianism, Hard Determinism | 自由意志：相容论、自由意志论、硬决定论
Hard determinism holds that every event is causally determined, so free will is an illusion. Libertarianism (agent-causation) insists that free will requires indeterminism and that we are uncaused causers. Compatibilism (soft determinism) redefines free will as the ability to act according to one’s desires without external coercion, even if desires are determined.
硬决定论认为所有事件都被因果决定，因此自由意志是幻觉。自由意志论（行动者因果）坚持自由意志需要非决定性，且我们是非被动的起因。相容论（软决定论）将自由意志重新定义为按照自身欲望行动且不受外部强迫的能力，即便欲望本身是被决定的。
Quick diagram: Determinism true? – Yes → Hard or Compatibilist? – No → Libertarian.
快速图示：决定论为真？——是 → 硬决定论还是相容论？——否 → 自由意志论。
11. Utilitarianism – Act vs Rule | 功利主义：行为与规则
Act utilitarianism (Bentham) judges each individual action by whether it maximises utility. Rule utilitarianism (Mill, though often read as act) judges actions by whether they follow rules that, if generally adopted, would maximise utility. The ‘hedonic calculus’ is Bentham’s method for measuring pleasure: intensity, duration, certainty, propinquity, fecundity, purity, extent.
行为功利主义（边沁）依据单个行为是否最大化功利来评判。规则功利主义（密尔，尽管常被解读为行为功利主义）依据行为是否遵循那些如果被普遍采纳就能最大化功利的规则。边沁的“快乐计算法”衡量快乐的七个维度：强度、持续时间、确定性、远近度、继生性、纯度、范围。
Mnemonic for hedonic calculus: Intensity, Duration, Certainty, Propinquity, Fecundity, Purity, Extent → “I Do Care For People’s Euphoria”.
快乐计算法记忆：强度、持续时间、确定性、远近度、继生性、纯度、范围 → 英文字母缩写可记作“I Do Care For People’s Euphoria”。
12. Kantian Ethics – Categorical Imperative Formulations | 康德伦理学：定言令式的形式
The categorical imperative commands without reference to any desired end. First formulation (universal law): ‘Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law.’ Second formulation (humanity): ‘Act so that you treat humanity, whether in your own person or that of another, always as an end and never merely as a means.’ Contradictions in conception or in will reveal imperfect duties.
定言令式是不参考任何欲求目的而发出的命令。第一形式（普遍法则）：“只依据你同时能够愿意它成为一项普遍法则的那项准则而行动。”第二形式（人性公式）：“你要如此行动，以至于你总是将人性——无论你自己还是他人——视为目的，而绝不仅仅当作手段。”构想中的矛盾或意愿中的矛盾揭示了不完全义务。
Memory: Universal law tests consistency; humanity formula tests respect for persons. Always treat rational beings as ends, not as mere tools.
记忆提示：普遍法则检验一致性；人性公式检验对人的尊重。永远将理性存在者视为目的而不仅仅是工具。
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