📚 Case Study Practice for Year 11 Eduqas Philosophy | 英国中考Eduqas哲学：案例分析实战演练
Case study questions on the Eduqas GCSE Philosophy paper are designed to test your ability to apply ethical theories, religious teachings and non-religious viewpoints to real-world scenarios. Mastering these questions means you can move confidently between knowledge (AO1) and analysis/evaluation (AO2), showing the examiner that you can think like a philosopher under timed conditions.
Eduqas GCSE 哲学试卷中的案例分析题旨在考查你将伦理理论、宗教教义和非宗教观点应用于真实情境的能力。掌握这类题目意味着你能够在知识陈述（AO1）与分析评估（AO2）之间自如切换，向考官展示你具备在限时条件下像哲学家一样思考的实力。
1. Understanding the Case Study Question on Eduqas | 了解Eduqas考试中的案例分析题
On the Eduqas Component 1 paper, you will encounter a 'part d)' question worth 12 marks. This question presents a short case study — a scenario involving an ethical dilemma — followed by a statement you must discuss. The instruction typically reads: 'Discuss this statement showing that you have considered more than one point of view. You must include reference to religion and belief.'
在Eduqas 试卷一（Component 1）中，你会遇到一道12分的 d) 部分题目。题目会提供一个简短的案例分析——包含伦理困境的情境——随后给出一个需要你讨论的陈述。题目指令通常为：“讨论该陈述，表明你考虑了不止一种观点。你必须涉及宗教与信仰的论述。”
The case study is not just a story; it is your springboard for debate. You must use it to anchor your arguments, showing how different ethical frameworks would address the dilemma. You are expected to draw on at least two religious traditions (Christianity and Islam are common choices) and a non-religious worldview such as Humanism.
案例分析不仅仅是一个故事；它是你展开辩论的跳板。你必须用它来锚定论点，展示不同的伦理框架将如何解决这一困境。你需要至少引用两种宗教传统（基督教和伊斯兰教是常见选择）以及一种非宗教世界观，例如人文主义。
2. AO1 and AO2: What Examiners Look For | AO1与AO2：考官评分标准
Eduqas marks your 12-mark case study answer using two Assessment Objectives. AO1 is about demonstrating knowledge and understanding of religious beliefs, teachings and practices. Here you show you know what Christians, Muslims or Humanists believe about the issue, quoting scripture or key concepts accurately.
Eduqas 使用两个评估目标来评阅你的12分案例分析答案。AO1 旨在展示你对宗教信仰、教义和实践的知识与理解。在这部分你要表明你知道基督徒、穆斯林或人文主义者对该议题的看法，并准确引用经文或关键概念。
AO2 is about analysis and evaluation. This is where you weigh up the strengths and weaknesses of different arguments, consider the implications of the case study, and reach a justified conclusion. The highest marks go to responses where AO2 outweighs AO1, meaning you do more than just list beliefs; you drill into them critically.
AO2 则关乎分析与评估。你需要权衡不同论点的优势和劣势，思考案例研究的含义，并得出有依据的结论。最高分属于 AO2 分量超过 AO1 的答案，这意味着你不能只是罗列信仰观点，而要进行批判性深挖。
3. Step-by-Step Guide to Tackling a Case Study | 案例分析步骤详解
First, read the scenario twice. Underline the people involved, the moral dilemma and any hints of religious or cultural context. Then, read the statement carefully and paraphrase it in your head — what is it really claiming?
首先，将情景阅读两遍。勾画出涉及的人物、道德困境以及任何宗教或文化背景的线索。然后，仔细阅读该陈述并在脑中复述——它究竟在主张什么？
Second, create a quick plan on your answer booklet. Use a simple table: one column for 'Religious perspectives agreeing with the statement', one for 'Religious perspectives disagreeing', and one for 'Non-religious perspectives'. Jot down evidence: Bible quotes, hadith, Humanist principles.
其次，在答题册上快速列出提纲。使用一个简单的表格：一栏为“同意陈述的宗教观点”，一栏为“不同意陈述的宗教观点”，一栏为“非宗教观点”。记下证据：圣经引文、圣训、人文主义原则。
Third, write your response. Start with a short introduction that references the case study, then develop each perspective in turn. Always link back to the scenario. End with a conclusion that offers your own reasoned judgement.
第三，撰写答案。开头简要引入案例情景，然后依次展开每个观点。始终回扣情景。最后给出包含你个人理性判断的结论。
Finally, check your answer for spelling of key terms, and ensure you used phrases like 'From a Christian perspective...', 'However, this could be challenged because...' to signal AO2.
最后，检查关键术语的拼写，确保你使用了诸如“从基督教角度看……”、“然而，这可能受到质疑，因为……”等短语来体现 AO2。
4. Case Study 1: Euthanasia and the Sanctity of Life | 案例一：安乐死与生命神圣性
Read the following scenario carefully:
仔细阅读以下情景：
David is a 72-year-old man diagnosed with motor neurone disease. His condition is terminal, and he suffers from constant, unbearable pain. He has repeatedly asked his doctor, a devout Christian, to prescribe lethal medication so he can die with dignity. The doctor refuses, citing his faith. David's family are divided: his wife believes in the sanctity of life and supports the doctor, while his son argues that compassion demands they respect David's wish.
大卫，72岁，被诊断患有运动神经元病。他的病情已进入晚期，持续承受着难以忍受的剧痛。他多次请求他的医生——一位虔诚的基督徒——开具致命药物，让他有尊严地离世。医生以信仰为由拒绝。大卫的家人意见分歧：妻子相信生命神圣性并支持医生，而儿子则认为同情心要求他们尊重大卫的意愿。
Statement to discuss: 'Religious believers should always oppose euthanasia.'
讨论陈述：“宗教信徒应当永远反对安乐死。”
5. Planning Your Answer for Case 1 | 案例一答案规划
Here is a model plan you could sketch in the exam. This table shows how to organise evidence efficiently.
下面是一个你能在考试中勾勒的模板提纲。该表格展示了如何高效组织证据。
| Perspective | 观点 | Agrees with statement | 同意陈述 | Disagrees with statement | 不同意陈述 |
|---|---|---|
| Christian | 基督教 | Sanctity of life (Genesis 1:27), 'Thou shalt not kill' (Exodus 20:13). God gives life, only God can take it away. Suffering can be redemptive (Jesus on cross). | Situation Ethics: most loving action could be to end suffering. Jesus showed compassion to outcasts; 'love your neighbour' may justify choosing a dignified death. |
| Islam | 伊斯兰教 | Qur'an 5:32 — taking a life is like killing all humanity. Only Allah gives and takes life. Suffering is a test; patience earns reward. | Principle of compassion (Rahma) and easing hardship. Some Muslim scholars permit withdrawing treatment (passive euthanasia) if recovery is hopeless; intention (niyyah) matters. |
| Humanist | 人文主义 | Humanists do not oppose euthanasia per se, but may agree that quality-of-life assessments can be slippery. | Individual autonomy and right to die with dignity are paramount. Personal happiness and reduction of suffering override sanctity arguments. Peter Singer's preference utilitarianism. |
6. Model Answer Paragraph: Christian Perspectives | 范文段落：基督教观点
From a traditional Christian viewpoint, one could strongly agree with the statement. The Bible teaches that human life is sacred because we are created in the image of God (imago Dei, Genesis 1:27). The commandment 'You shall not murder' (Exodus 20:13) is interpreted by many Christians as an absolute prohibition on taking innocent life. In David's case, the doctor's refusal stems from this belief: even if David desires death, assisting him would usurp God's authority over life and death. Catholics go further, teaching in the Catechism that euthanasia is a 'murderous act' that violates the natural law. Furthermore, suffering is not meaningless; it can unite a believer with the suffering of Christ on the cross, offering redemptive value. Thus, religious believers must always oppose euthanasia to remain faithful.
从传统基督教观点来看，人们可以强烈支持该陈述。《圣经》教导，人的生命是神圣的，因为我们是按照上帝的形象所造（imago Dei，创世记1:27）。“不可杀人”（出埃及记20:13）这条诫命被许多基督徒理解为绝对禁止夺走无辜的生命。在大卫的案例中，医生的拒绝正是源于这一信仰：即便大卫渴望死亡，帮助他也等于篡夺了上帝对生死的权柄。天主教进一步在《教理问答》中教导，安乐死是一种“谋杀行为”，违反了自然律。此外，苦难并非毫无意义；它能让信徒与基督在十字架上的受难结合，具有救赎价值。因此，宗教信徒必须永远反对安乐死以保持忠诚。
However, other Christians might disagree by applying Situation Ethics. Joseph Fletcher argued that the only absolute rule is agape — selfless, unconditional love. In this case, if David's suffering is beyond control and his pleas are rational, the most loving action could be to support his wish. Jesus consistently showed healing compassion to those in agony, and the Golden Rule — 'do to others what you would have them do to you' (Matthew 7:12) — could lead a Christian to ask: 'If I were in David's position, what would I want?' Liberal Protestants might therefore argue that compassion overrides a blanket ban. This shows that not all religious believers think alike, so the statement cannot hold universally.
然而，其他基督徒可能会运用情境伦理学来反对。约瑟夫·弗莱彻主张，唯一绝对的准则就是 agape——无私、无条件的爱。在本案中，若大卫的痛苦难以控制且他的请求是理性的，那么最有爱的行为可能就是支持他的愿望。耶稣始终向身处痛苦中的人展现出医治的怜悯，而金律——“你们愿意人怎样待你们，你们也要怎样待人”（马太福音7:12）——会引领一个基督徒去问：“如果我处于大卫的境地，我会想要什么？”因此，自由派新教徒可能会认为怜悯心超越了绝对禁止。这表明并非所有宗教信徒的想法都一致，因此该陈述并非放之四海而皆准。
7. Model Answer Paragraph: Islamic Perspectives | 范文段落：伊斯兰教观点
Islam, too, provides strong grounds to agree with the statement. The Qur'an explicitly forbids killing: 'Whoever kills a soul... it is as if he had slain mankind entirely' (Surah Al-Ma'idah 5:32). Life is a trust (amanah) from Allah, and only He has the right to take it. In David's scenario, a devout Muslim doctor would almost certainly refuse to prescribe lethal drugs, believing that enduring pain with patience is a test from Allah, for which the believer will be rewarded in the afterlife. The concept of Qadr (predestination) reminds Muslims that every moment of life, including suffering, is decreed by Allah's wisdom. There is no room for active euthanasia in mainstream Islamic scholarship, so the statement seems correct from this angle.
伊斯兰教同样为支持该陈述提供了强有力的依据。《古兰经》明确禁止杀人：“凡枉杀一人的……如杀众人”（马意代章5:32）。生命是真主所托付的信托（amanah），唯有真主有权取走。在大卫的情景中，一位虔诚的穆斯林医生几乎肯定会拒绝开具致命药物，相信以坚忍承受痛苦是真主的一项考验，信士将在后世因此获得回赐。前定（Qadr）的概念提醒穆斯林，生命的每一刻，包括苦难，都是由真主的智慧所定。主动安乐死在主流伊斯兰学术中毫无余地，因此从这个角度看，该陈述似乎正确。
Nevertheless, disagreement emerges around the edge of the debate. The Islamic principle of Rahma (compassion) and the duty to relieve hardship are highly valued. Some jurists permit passive euthanasia — withdrawing life support when recovery is unequivocally impossible — because the intention (niyyah) is not to kill but to stop interfering with Allah's natural decree. In David's case, if his pain cannot be alleviated and death is imminent, a minority of scholars might say that giving heavy pain relief that incidentally shortens life (double effect) is permissible. This nuance challenges the word 'always' in the statement, proving that even within Islam, extreme suffering raises complex questions that resist a simple 'always oppose' rule.
然而，围绕争论的边缘地带出现了分歧。伊斯兰教的怜悯（Rahma）原则与减轻苦难的义务备受重视。一些法学家允许被动安乐死——当康复确无可能时撤除生命维持系统——因为其举意（niyyah）并非杀人，而是停止干预真主的自然定制。在大卫的案例中，若他的疼痛无法缓解且死亡临近，少数学者可能会说，给予大剂量镇痛药但可能附带缩短生命（双效原则）是允许的。这一细微差别挑战了陈述中的“永远”一词，证明即便在伊斯兰教内部，极端的苦难也会引发复杂问题，无法简单套用“永远反对”的规则。
8. Model Answer Paragraph: Humanist Perspectives and Evaluation | 范文段落：人文主义观点与评估
Humanists firmly reject the statement. Their worldview centres on human autonomy, reason and the pursuit of quality of life. For a Humanist, David's right to self-determination is paramount. If he is of sound mind and his suffering is unbearable, forcing him to live against his will is cruel and an infringement on his personal freedom. Peter Singer's preference utilitarianism would argue that David's preference to end his life should be respected because it maximises his well-being and minimises suffering. Humanists therefore not only permit euthanasia but often campaign for its legalisation. This directly undermines any claim that religious principles should dictate the law for everyone, especially in a pluralist society. In evaluating the strength of the statement, the Humanist voice exposes a key weakness: the statement imposes one religious lens on a diverse moral landscape, ignoring the autonomy of individuals like David.
人文主义者坚决反对这一陈述。他们的世界观以人的自主性、理性和对生活质量的追求为中心。对人文主义者来说，大卫的自决权至关重要。如果他心智健全且痛苦不堪，强迫他违背意愿继续活着就是残忍的，是对他个人自由的侵犯。彼得·辛格的偏好功利主义会论证，应当尊重大卫终结生命的偏好，因为这将最大化其福祉并最小化痛苦。因此，人文主义者不仅容许安乐死，而且常常为使其合法化而奔走。这直接削弱了任何声称宗教原则应主导法律适用于所有人的主张，尤其是在一个多元社会中。在评估该陈述的力度时，人文主义声音揭示了一个关键弱点：该陈述将单一宗教视角强加于多样化的道德图景上，忽视了大卫这样的个体的自主权。
To conclude, while the statement finds strong support in the sanctity of life teachings of both Christianity and Islam, it crumbles under the weight of 'always'. The existence of situationist Christian ethics, minority Islamic concessions and the robust Humanist focus on dignity shows that religious opposition to euthanasia is not monolithic. Therefore, it is unreasonable to claim that religious believers should always oppose euthanasia; compassion and reason can lead believers of all kinds to support a merciful end to suffering in tragic cases like David's.
综上所述，尽管该陈述在基督教和伊斯兰教的生命神圣性教义中找到了有力支持，但它在“永远”一词的重压下崩溃了。基督教情境主义伦理、伊斯兰教少数派让步以及人文主义对尊严的有力聚焦，都表明宗教对安乐死的反对并非铁板一块。因此，宣称宗教信徒应永远反对安乐死是不合理的；怜悯与理性可以引导各类信徒，在像大卫这样的悲剧案例中，支持以仁慈终结苦难。
9. Common Mistakes and How to Avoid Them | 常见错误与避免方法
One frequent mistake is writing a generic essay on euthanasia without weaving the case study details into your arguments. Examiners penalise responses that only mention 'David' at the beginning and end. Instead, use phrases like 'In David's situation, where his pain is described as unbearable...', or 'The doctor's faith is directly challenged by David's request, showing that...' to embed the scenario throughout.
常见错误之一是写一篇关于安乐死的泛泛之文，而没有将案例细节编织进论点中。考官会扣分那些仅仅在开头和结尾提到“大卫”的答案。相反，应使用诸如“在大卫的情境中，其痛苦被描述为难以忍受……”或“医生的信仰直接被大卫的请求所挑战，这表明……”等短语，将情景贯穿始终。
Another error is failing to balance perspectives. Some students only argue one side strongly, forgetting that the question demands a discussion. Always structure your answer to present a 'for the statement' view from a religion, then a 'against the statement' view from the same or another religion, then a non-religious view. This guarantees you hit the assessment criteria for considering more than one point of view.
另一错误是未能平衡各方观点。一些学生只强有力地论证一方，忘记了题目要求讨论。始终将你的答案构建为：先呈现一个宗教‘支持陈述’的观点，再呈现相同或另一宗教‘反对陈述’的观点，然后是一种非宗教观点。这确保你达到考虑不止一种观点的评估标准。
Finally, avoid weak conclusions that simply repeat the question. Your conclusion must come down on one side, acknowledging complexity but giving your clear, justified judgement. A strong conclusion uses words like 'ultimately', 'however', or 'the balance of argument suggests...', and directly addresses why the statement succeeds or fails.
最后，避免那种仅仅重复问题的薄弱结论。你的结论必须明确支持一方，承认复杂性但给出清晰、有理由的评判。强有力的结论会使用诸如“最终”、“然而”或“论点的权衡表明……”等词，并直接论述该陈述为何成立或不成立。
10. Case Study 2: Animal Experimentation | 案例二：动物实验
Here is a second practice case, this time drawing on the 'Issues of Good and Evil' or 'Issues of Human Rights' aspects of the Eduqas course. Use it to test your skills independently.
这是第二个练习案例，此次取材于Eduqas 课程中“善恶问题”或“人权问题”相关方面。用它来独立检验你的技能。
PharmaLab is a medical research company that tests new cancer drugs on mice and rats. The tests inevitably cause some animals to suffer and die. A group of activists breaks into the lab at night and releases all the animals, arguing that animal testing is morally wrong because all sentient creatures have rights. The company insists that such research saves thousands of human lives and is tightly regulated. A local Christian charity supports the activists, quoting Proverbs 12:10: 'The righteous care for the needs of their animals.' Meanwhile, an Islamic medical ethics committee defends the research, citing the Qur'anic teaching that humans are stewards (khalifah) of creation and can use animals for a just purpose.
制药实验室 PharmaLab 是一家用小鼠和大鼠测试新型抗癌药物的医学研究公司。这些测试不可避免地导致一些动物受苦和死亡。一群活动人士深夜闯入实验室，放走了所有动物，他们主张动物试验在道德上是错误的，因为一切有感知的生物都拥有权利。公司坚称此类研究能拯救成千上万的人类生命，并且受到严格监管。当地一个基督教慈善机构引用箴言12:10“义人顾惜他牲畜的命”来支持活动人士。同时，一个伊斯兰医学伦理委员会为此类研究辩护，引用《古兰经》中人类是大地代治者（khalifah）的教导，认为人类可以为正当目的使用动物。
Statement to discuss: 'Religious believers should always prioritise human life over animal suffering.'
讨论陈述：“宗教信徒应当永远将人类生命置于动物痛苦之上。”
In your response, consider Christian and Islamic teachings about dominion versus stewardship, sanctity of human life, and vegetarian/vegan Christian movements. Also introduce a Humanist view, perhaps using Jeremy Bentham's utilitarian calculation: 'The question is not, Can they reason? nor, Can they talk? but, Can they suffer?' This open-ended practice will refine your ability to handle any case study Eduqas sets.
在回答中，请考虑基督教与伊斯兰教关于管辖与代治（stewardship）的教导、人类生命的神圣性，以及基督教素食/纯素运动。同时引入人文主义观点，或许可使用杰里米·边沁的功利计算：“问题不在于，它们能推理吗？也不在于，它们能说话吗？而在于，它们能感受痛苦吗？”这个开放性练习将磨练你处理Eduqas 可能设置任何案例分析题的能力。
11. Key Phrases and Sentence Starters | 关键词语与句式开头
Employing precise language shows the examiner you are confident in philosophical discourse. Below are some bilingual phrases you can memorise and adapt.
使用精准的语言能向考官展示你对哲学论述充满信心。以下是一些你可以记忆并灵活运用的双语短语。
- For the case study: 'In the scenario described, we can see that...' / “在所描述的情景中，我们可以看到……”
- Introducing a religious view: 'From a Christian/Islamic perspective, many would argue that...' / “从基督教/伊斯兰教的角度看，许多人会论证……”
- Quoting scripture: 'This belief is rooted in...' / “这一信念植根于……”
- Counter-argument: 'However, this view can be challenged by...' / “然而，这一观点可能受到……的挑战。”
- Humanist voice: 'In contrast, a Humanist would reject this because...' / “相比之下，人文主义者会反对这一点，因为……”
- Linking back: 'Applying this to David's/PharmaLab's situation...' / “将此应用于大卫/制药实验室的处境……”
- Evaluation: 'The strength of this argument lies in...' / “该论点的优势在于……”
- Conclusion: 'Ultimately, the statement is unconvincing/convincing because...' / “最终，该陈述缺乏说服力/令人信服，因为……”
12. Final Tips for Exam Success | 考试成功最后提示
Time management is critical. For a 12-mark case study, spend around 15 minutes: 3 minutes planning, 10 minutes writing, 2 minutes checking. Never leave this question blank; a partial answer with clear structure still gets marks. Remember that Eduqas rewards 'developed reasoning', so every factual point you make should be followed by a 'because' or 'this means that' reflection.
时间管理至关重要。对于一道12分的案例分析题，大约分配15分钟：3分钟计划，10分钟写作，2分钟检查。绝不要空着不答；一个结构清晰的半成品仍能得分。记住，Eduqas 奖励“展开的推理”，因此你提出的每个事实要点都应用“因为”或“这意味着”的思考来跟进。
Also, keep your religious references precise. Vague mentions of 'the Bible says' without a verse or a clear concept weaken your AO1. For Christianity, quotes like Genesis 1:27, Exodus 20:13, Mark 12:31 (love your neighbour) are gold. For Islam, Surah 5:32, the concept of Khalifah (stewardship), and the principle of Rahma (compassion) carry the same weight. A Humanist citation of the 2014 British Humanist Association stance on assisted dying or Singer's preference utilitarianism adds sophistication.
另外，确保宗教引用准确。笼统地提“圣经说”却没有经文或清晰概念会削弱你的AO1。对基督教而言，创世记1:27、出埃及记20:13、马可福音12:31（爱邻舍）等引文是得分利器。对伊斯兰教，马意代章5:32、代治者（Khalifah）概念以及怜悯（Rahma）原则具有同等分量。引用人文主义2014年英国人文主义协会对辅助死亡的立场或辛格的偏好功利主义则能增添深度。
Finally, trust your philosophical instincts. The case studies are designed to be accessible, and there is rarely one 'correct' answer. What matters is your ability to reason coherently, respect multiple traditions, and reach a thoughtful verdict. Practice with different case studies — abortion, crime and punishment, wealth and poverty — and you will walk into the exam hall ready to excel.
最后，相信你的哲学直觉。案例分析题的设计是通俗易懂的，很少有一个“正确”答案。重要的是你能否条理清晰地推理、尊重多元传统，并得出深思熟虑的结论。用不同案例——堕胎、犯罪与惩罚、财富与贫穷——多加练习，你便能自信步入考场，取得佳绩。
Published by TutorHao | Philosophy 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