AS Eduqas Philosophy: Vocabulary & Terminology Rapid Memorisation Guide | AS Eduqas 哲学：词汇术语速记指南

📚 AS Eduqas Philosophy: Vocabulary & Terminology Rapid Memorisation Guide | AS Eduqas 哲学：词汇术语速记指南

Mastering the terminology of AS Philosophy can feel like learning a new language. This rapid memorisation guide breaks down the essential Eduqas vocabulary into logical clusters, pairing each term with a clear explanation and a memory hack that actually works. Use it alongside your note-making to lock in definitions for exam success.

掌握 AS 哲学的术语就像学一门新语言。这份速记指南把Eduqas核心词汇拆解成逻辑模块，每个术语都配有清晰解释和真正管用的记忆窍门。和你的笔记一起使用，牢牢记住定义，从容应对考试。

1. Foundational Epistemology Terms | 认识论基础术语

Epistemology starts with three building blocks: knowledge, belief, and justification. Think of knowledge as a house: belief is the foundation, justification reinforces the walls, and truth is the roof that completes the structure. The classic definition ‘justified true belief’ is often linked to Plato’s Theaetetus, though Gettier later shook the house with counterexamples.

认识论从三个基本构件开始：知识、信念与辩护。把知识想象成一座房子：信念是地基，辩护加固墙壁，真理是完成结构的屋顶。经典定义“得到辩护的真信念”常与柏拉图的《泰阿泰德篇》关联，尽管后来盖梯尔用反例撼动了这座房子。

Memory tip: Repeat the acronym JTB (Justified True Belief) and visualise a scale — justification tips the belief into knowledge only when truth is present. Watch out for ‘Gettier cases’ where someone has a justified true belief by luck.

记忆技巧：反复念缩写 JTB（Justified True Belief），并想象一架天平——唯有真理在场时，辩护才让信念变成知识。警惕“盖梯尔案例”，那些凭运气得到的辩护真信念并不算知识。

2. A Priori vs A Posteriori | 先天与后天

A priori knowledge is independent of sense experience — you can know it from the comfort of your armchair. Mathematical truths like 2 + 3 = 5 are a priori. A posteriori knowledge, by contrast, requires empirical investigation: you need to step outside and check whether it is raining.

先天知识独立于感官经验——你坐在扶手椅上就能知道。像 2 + 3 = 5 这样的数学真理是先天知识。相反，后天知识需要经验探究：你得走到外面看看是否在下雨。

Memory tip: Link ‘a priori’ to ‘prior’ to experience; think ‘before’ the senses get involved. For ‘a posteriori’, picture a detective ‘post’-scene investigation, gathering evidence.

记忆技巧：把“a priori”联系到“prior”（在先）；想象感觉参与之前的状态。对于“a posteriori”，想象侦探在“事后”（post-）现场勘查、收集证据。

3. Analytic vs Synthetic | 分析命题与综合命题

An analytic statement is true purely in virtue of the meanings of its words, like “All bachelors are unmarried men.” The predicate is already contained within the subject — unpack it and you find nothing new. A synthetic statement, such as “The cat is on the mat,” adds information beyond the subject; it says something about the world that might turn out false.

分析命题仅凭词语意义即为真，比如“所有单身汉都是未婚男子”。谓语已经包含在主词里——拆解开来找不到新信息。综合命题，如“猫在垫子上”，在主词之外添加了信息；它关于世界的说法可能是假的。

Memory tip: Think of ‘analyzing’ a word like breaking a geode — you already have everything inside. Synthetic means you ‘synthesise’ or bring together subject and predicate from separate observations.

记忆技巧：把分析想象成敲开晶洞——里面的一切本来就在。综合意味着你从各自的观察中“合成”主词与谓词。

4. Necessary vs Contingent | 必然与偶然

A necessary truth could not have been false in any possible world; denying it leads to a contradiction. “2 + 2 = 4” and “a triangle has three sides” are necessary. Contingent truths happen to be true but could easily have been otherwise — your existence, the colour of your front door, or the fact that it rained last Tuesday.

必然真理在任何可能世界都不可能为假；否定它会导向矛盾。“2 + 2 = 4”和“三角形有三条边”是必然的。偶然真理恰好为真，但完全可能是别的样子——你的存在、你家大门的颜色、或者上星期二下雨的事实。

Memory tip: Imagine a pendulum swinging — ‘contingent’ truths could swing either way and still make sense. ‘Necessary’ truths are locked in place, unable to move.

记忆技巧：想象一个摆锤——“偶然”真理可以摆向任一方向而仍然合乎情理。“必然”真理则被锁定，无法移动。

5. Rationalism vs Empiricism | 理性主义与经验主义

Rationalists argue that reason is the primary source of knowledge; we are born with innate ideas that enable us to work out truths about the world. Think of Descartes’ cogito: “I think, therefore I am.” Empiricists, like Locke and Hume, insist the mind starts as a blank slate — all knowledge enters through the senses.

理性主义者主张理性是知识的主要来源；我们生来具有天赋观念，凭借它们推出关于世界的真理。想想笛卡尔的“我思故我在”。经验主义者如洛克和休谟则坚持心灵原本是一块白板——所有知识都通过感官进入。

Memory tip: Picture a rationalist as a mathematician pondering in a dark room, knowledge glowing from within. An empiricist is a naturalist with a net, catching data from the outside world.

记忆技巧：把理性主义者想象成在暗室中沉思的数学家，知识从内部发光。经验主义者则是手握捕网的博物学家，从外部世界捕捞数据。

6. Direct Realism & Indirect Realism | 直接实在论与间接实在论

Direct realism claims perception gives us immediate, unmediated access to mind‑independent objects. When you see a tree, you are directly aware of the tree itself. Indirect realism says you only see a mental representation — a sense‑datum — and infer the external object behind it. Locke’s primary and secondary qualities sit firmly in this camp.

直接实在论声称知觉让我们直接、无中介地接触到心灵独立的物体。你看到一棵树时，直接意识到的是树本身。间接实在论说你只看到心理表征——感觉材料——并由此推断背后的外部对象。洛克的第一性质与第二性质理论坚定地站在这一阵营。

Memory tip: Direct = no middleman, like shaking hands with the person. Indirect = you look at a photograph of that person; you don’t meet them directly, but the photo represents them.

记忆技巧：直接 = 没有中间人，就像与本人握手。间接 = 你看着那个人的照片；你没有直接见到他们，但照片代表他们。

---

7. Ethical Key Terms: Cognitivism & Non‑cognitivism | 伦理学术语：认知主义与非认知主义

Cognitivists maintain that moral judgements express beliefs that can be true or false. “Murder is wrong” is a statement of fact about the world. Non‑cognitivists argue moral language does not state facts at all — it expresses emotions (emotivism) or prescriptions (prescriptivism), like shouting “Boo!” or giving a command.

认知主义者主张道德判断表达可判真假的信念。“谋杀是错误的”是关于世界的事实陈述。非认知主义者认为道德语言根本不陈述事实——它表达情绪（情感主义）或指令（规约主义），就像喊“呸！”或下达命令。

Memory tip: Cognitive = knows something; treat moral claims as knowledge claims. Non‑cognitive = they don’t ‘know’; they just feel or command. If it looks like an opinion that cannot be proven by science, ask: “Is this feeling or fact?”

记忆技巧：认知 = 知某事；把道德主张当作知识主张。非认知 = 它们并不“知”；它们只是感受或命令。如果某个表述看似科学无法证明的观点，就问：“这是感受还是事实？”

8. Utilitarianism Essentials | 功利主义核心术语

Utilitarianism is a consequentialist theory: the right action is the one that maximises utility. Jeremy Bentham’s hedonic calculus measures pleasure vs pain across seven dimensions, including intensity and duration. John Stuart Mill refined Bentham by introducing higher and lower pleasures — ‘better to be Socrates dissatisfied than a fool satisfied.’

功利主义是一种后果论理论：正确的行为是最大化功利的行为。边沁的快乐计算法从七个维度衡量快乐与痛苦，包括强度和持续时间。密尔改进了边沁，引入高级快乐与低级快乐——“宁做不满足的苏格拉底，不做满足的傻瓜”。

Memory tip: Imagine a maths teacher calculating the greatest happiness for the greatest number — utilitarianism as a moral spreadsheet. For Mill’s higher pleasures, picture a library vs a video‑game arcade, both producing pleasure, but one being more ‘human’.

记忆技巧：想象一位数学老师在计算最大多数人的最大幸福——功利主义就像一张道德电子表格。对于密尔的高级快乐，想象图书馆与电子游戏厅，两者都产生快乐，但其中一个更具“人性”。

9. Kantian Deontology | 康德义务论术语

Deontology focuses on duty, not consequences. Kant’s Categorical Imperative comes in several formulations: the Universal Law formulation (“Act only according to that maxim whereby you can at the same time will that it should become a universal law”) and the Humanity formula (“Treat humanity never merely as a means but always at the same time as an end”). Perfect duties are exceptionless; imperfect duties, like developing talents, allow flexibility.

义务论关注义务而非后果。康德的定言命令有几种表述：普遍法则公式（“只依据那个你同时愿意它成为普遍法则的准则去行动”）和人性公式（“始终把人当作目的，绝不仅仅当作手段”）。完全义务没有例外；不完全义务，如发展才能，允许灵活性。

Memory tip: Picture a strict medieval knight who obeys a moral code regardless of the chaos around him — duty for duty’s sake. The Universal Law test is like asking: “What if everyone did this, and you had to live in that world?”

记忆技巧：想象一名严格的中世纪骑士，无论周围多么混乱都恪守道德准则——为义务而义务。普遍法则测试就像是问：“如果每个人都这样做，并且你必须生活在那个世界里，会怎样？”

10. Philosophy of Religion: Theistic Arguments | 宗教哲学：有神论论证术语

The teleological argument (design argument) points to the complexity and apparent purpose in nature as evidence of a designer — Paley’s watchmaker analogy being the classic move. The cosmological argument seeks a first cause or necessary being to explain why anything exists at all. Aquinas’s First Three Ways are central here. The ontological argument, championed by Anselm, defines God as “that than which nothing greater can be conceived” and argues that existence in reality is greater than existence in the mind alone, so God must exist.

目的论论证（设计论证）把自然界的复杂性和明显的目的性当作设计者存在的证据——佩利的钟表匠类比是经典招式。宇宙论论证寻求第一因或必然存在者，以解释为什么任何事物存在。阿奎那的前三个证明在这里至关重要。本体论论证由安瑟伦提出，把上帝定义为“那无法设想有比之更伟大的存在者”，并论证现实中存在比仅存在于心中更伟大，因此上帝必然存在。

Memory tip: For teleological, think ‘telescope’ — looking at intricate design. Cosmological = ‘cosmos’ + ‘logic’ — reasoning about the whole universe’s origin. Ontological = ‘onto’ (being) — playing with the concept of being itself.

记忆技巧：对于目的论，想到“望远镜”——观察精巧的设计。宇宙论 = “宇宙” + “逻辑”——推理整个宇宙的起源。本体论 = “onto”（存在）——玩弄存在本身的概念。

11. The Problem of Evil | 恶的问题术语

The logical problem of evil argues that the existence of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God is incompatible with the existence of evil. The evidential problem focuses on the sheer amount and distribution of suffering. A theodicy, like Augustine’s soul‑deciding or Irenaeus’ soul‑making, attempts to justify God’s permission of evil. The free will defence insists that genuine free will is so valuable it outweighs the evil caused by its misuse.

恶的逻辑问题论证，全能全善的上帝与恶的存在无法兼容。恶的证据问题则聚焦于苦难的巨大数量和分布。神义论，如奥古斯丁的“灵魂决定”说或爱任纽的“灵魂塑造”说，试图为上帝容许恶提供辩护。自由意志辩护坚称，真正的自由意志极其宝贵，足以胜过因其误用而产生的恶。

Memory tip: Visualise a courtroom: evil is the evidence against God; a theodicy is the defence’s closing speech. The free will defence is the star witness arguing that without freedom, love and morality would be meaningless.

记忆技巧：想象一个法庭：恶是控告上帝的证据；神义论是辩护律师的结案陈词。自由意志辩护是明星证人，主张没有自由，爱和道德将毫无意义。

12. Quick Memory Tips Summary | 速记技巧总结

Turn abstract concepts into vivid images: for ‘a priori’, picture a brain glowing before any eyes open. Use acronyms like JTB for knowledge, FWD for Free Will Defence. Draw contrast tables: rationalism on the left, empiricism on the right. Tell a story: imagine two philosophers arguing across a table — one clutching a calculator (rationalist), the other a camera (empiricist). Finally, test yourself by teaching the terms aloud to a rubber duck — if the duck understands, you truly know the material.

把抽象概念转化为鲜活图像：对于“先天”，想象一个大脑在任何眼睛睁开之前发光。使用缩写，如 JTB 代表知识，FWD 代表自由意志辩护。画对比表格：左边理性主义，右边经验主义。讲一个故事：想象两位哲学家隔桌争论——一个紧握计算器（理性主义者），另一个拿着相机（经验主义者）。最后，大声向一只橡皮鸭讲解术语来测试自己——如果鸭子听懂了，你就真正掌握了材料。

Published by TutorHao | Philosophy Revision Series | aleveler.com

更多咨询请联系16621398022（同微信）