📚 Year 8 WJEC Philosophy: Formula & Theorem Quick Reference | Year 8 WJEC 哲学：公式定理速查手册
Philosophy isn't just about big words and old books — it's a toolkit for clear thinking. Just like maths has formulas and science has laws, philosophy gives us mental 'formulas' to reason well, spot bad arguments, and make wiser choices. This quick reference handbook collects the most important philosophical formulas and thinking theorems you will meet in Year 8 WJEC Philosophy. Keep it handy to sharpen your mind.
哲学不只是那些大词和古书——它是清晰思考的工具箱。正如数学有公式、科学有定律一样，哲学为我们提供了思维的“公式”，帮助我们正确推理、识别糟糕的论证并做出更明智的选择。这本速查手册汇集了你在 Year 8 WJEC 哲学课程中会遇到的最重要的哲学公式和思维定理。把它放在手边，让你的头脑更加敏锐。
1. The Socratic Questioning Formula | 苏格拉底式提问公式
Socrates believed wisdom begins with admitting we don't know, and then asking sharp questions to test ideas. The basic formula is: Question → Examine → Refine. Start by asking 'What do you mean by that?', then look for contradictions, and finally adjust your definition.
苏格拉底认为，智慧始于承认自己无知，然后通过尖锐的问题来检验观点。基本公式是：提问 → 审视 → 完善。先问“你这样说是什么意思？”，然后找出矛盾之处，最后调整你的定义。
For example, if someone says 'courage is never being afraid', you might ask: 'Is a firefighter who feels fear but still saves someone not courageous?' This testing process refines our concepts.
例如，如果有人声称“勇敢就是从不害怕”，你可以反问：“一位感到恐惧但仍然舍身救人的消防员难道不勇敢吗？”这个检验过程会完善我们的概念。
| Step | Action |
| 1. Clarify | Ask 'What do you mean by X?' |
| 2. Probe | Find an exception or contradiction |
| 3. Refine | Update the definition to cover the case |
2. The Logical Syllogism | 逻辑三段论公式
A syllogism is a classic reasoning structure that combines two premises to reach a conclusion. If the premises are true and the form is valid, the conclusion must be true. The standard formula: Major Premise + Minor Premise → Conclusion.
三段论是一种经典的推理结构，通过结合两个前提得出结论。如果前提为真且形式有效，则结论必然为真。标准公式为：大前提 + 小前提 → 结论。
Example: All humans are mortal (major premise). Socrates is a human (minor premise). Therefore, Socrates is mortal (conclusion).
例子：所有人都会死（大前提）。苏格拉底是人（小前提）。因此，苏格拉底会死（结论）。
Watch out for faulty syllogisms: 'All dogs are animals. My cat is an animal. Therefore, my cat is a dog.' The form is invalid because the middle term 'animal' is distributed incorrectly.
要小心错误的三段论：“所有的狗都是动物。我的猫是动物。因此，我的猫是狗。”这个形式是无效的，因为中项“动物”被错误地分配了。
3. The Argument Formula | 论证公式
Every strong argument follows a simple recipe: Claim + Reason + Evidence. The claim is what you want the audience to accept. The reason explains why the claim is true. Evidence backs it up with facts or examples.
每一个有力的论证都遵循一个简单的配方：主张 + 理由 + 证据。主张是你想让听众接受的观点。理由解释为什么该主张是正确的。证据用事实或例子来支持它。
For instance, 'School uniforms should be optional (claim) because they restrict personal expression (reason). A survey showed 68% of students feel more creative when choosing their own clothes (evidence).'
例如，“校服应该改为可选项（主张），因为它限制了个人表达（理由）。一项调查显示，68% 的学生在选择自己的衣服时感到更有创造力（证据）。”
When evaluating arguments, always check if the reason actually supports the claim, and whether the evidence is reliable.
在评估论证时，务必检查理由是否真正支持主张，以及证据是否可靠。
4. The Utilitarian Happiness Calculus | 功利主义幸福演算
Jeremy Bentham proposed that moral decisions can be made by measuring pleasure and pain. The basic formula: Net Happiness = Sum of (Pleasure − Pain) for all affected. Choose the action that produces the greatest total happiness.
杰里米·边沁提出，道德决策可以通过衡量快乐与痛苦来做。基本公式是：净幸福 = 所有受影响者的（快乐 − 痛苦）之和。选择能产生最大总幸福的行为。
Factors to consider: intensity, duration, certainty, and how many people are affected. If one action gives 10 people mild joy (+5 each) and another gives 1 person extreme pleasure (+50), the total for the first is +50 and the second is +50 — they might be equal in this simple calculus, but then we must ask deeper questions about distribution.
需要考虑的因素：强度、持续时间、确定性以及受影响的人数。如果一种行为给 10 个人带来轻微快乐（每人 +5），另一种行为给 1 个人带来极大快乐（+50），那么前者的总和是 +50，后者也是 +50——在这个简单的演算中它们可能相等，但我们接下来必须追问关于分配公平的更深层问题。
5. The Dialectic Formula | 辩证过程公式
Hegel described a process of progress through conflict: Thesis + Antithesis → Synthesis. An initial idea (thesis) meets its opposite (antithesis). Their clash produces a new, higher-level idea (synthesis) that preserves what is true from both sides.
黑格尔描述了一种通过冲突实现进步的过程：正题 + 反题 → 合题。一个初始观点（正题）遇到它的对立面（反题）。它们的碰撞产生出一个新的、更高层次的观点（合题），保留了双方的合理之处。
For example, in a debate about 'Should we always tell the truth?' The thesis might be 'Yes, honesty is always best.' The antithesis might be 'No, white lies can protect feelings.' A synthesis could be 'Tell the truth whenever possible, but allow small exceptions when kindness requires it.'
例如，在“我们应该永远说真话吗？”的辩论中，正题可能是“是，诚实永远是最好的。”反题可能是“不，善意的谎言可以保护感情。”合题则可能是“在可能的情况下说实话，但在善意需要的时候允许小小的例外。”
6. Descartes' Method of Doubt | 笛卡尔怀疑法
Descartes wanted to find absolutely certain knowledge. His formula: Doubt Everything → Find What Cannot Be Doubted → Build Knowledge. He doubted his senses, even the existence of the physical world, until he reached one indubitable truth: 'I think, therefore I am' (Cogito, ergo sum).
笛卡尔想要找到绝对确定的知识。他的方法是：怀疑一切 → 找到无法被怀疑的东西 → 构建知识。他怀疑自己的感官，甚至怀疑物理世界的存在，直到他找到一个无可置疑的真理：“我思故我在”（Cogito, ergo sum）。
From this firm foundation, he tried to rebuild all knowledge logically. In your own thinking, you can use the formula: identify one belief you are 100% certain of, and see what else you can deduce from it.
在这个坚实基础上，他试图逻辑地重建一切知识。在你自己的思维中，你可以使用这个公式：找出一个你百分之百确定的信念，然后看看能从中推导出什么其他东西。
7. The Golden Rule Formula | 黄金法则公式
The Golden Rule appears in many ethical traditions: Treat others as you would want to be treated. It is a universal moral formula: imagine yourself in the other person's situation before acting.
黄金法则出现在众多道德传统中：你希望别人怎样对待你，你就怎样对待别人。这是一条通用的道德公式：在行动之前，想象自己处于对方的位置。
Its negative version is equally powerful: Do not do to others what you would not want done to yourself. Both versions work as a quick test for right and wrong in everyday situations.
它的否定形式同样有力：己所不欲，勿施于人。这两个版本都可以作为日常生活中判断对错的快速测试。
8. Fallacy Detection Formulas | 谬误检测公式
A fallacy is a mistake in reasoning. Knowing the formulas helps you spot them. Here are some common fallacy patterns:
谬误是推理中的错误。了解这些公式有助于你识别它们。以下是一些常见的谬误模式：
- Ad Hominem: Attacking the person instead of the argument. Formula: 'You're wrong because you're [insult].'
- Straw Man: Misrepresenting an argument to make it easier to attack. Formula: 'You say X, which is basically Y, and Y is ridiculous.'
- Slippery Slope: Assuming one step will inevitably lead to extreme consequences. Formula: 'If A happens, then B will happen, then C ... all the way to Z disaster.'
- 人身攻击：攻击人而不是论证。公式：“你错了，因为你是个[侮辱性词语]。”
- 稻草人：歪曲一个论点以便更容易攻击。公式：“你说 X，那基本上就是 Y，而 Y 是很荒谬的。”
- 滑坡谬误：假设一小步将不可避免地导致极端后果。公式：“如果 A 发生，那么 B 就会发生，然后 C……一直发展到 Z 灾难。”
9. The Justice Equation | 正义方程式
What is fair? Philosophers like John Rawls have proposed formulas. One simple version: Fairness = Equality + Need − Bias. Equality means everyone gets the same basic rights. Need means those who are worse off may require extra support. Bias must be removed to see the situation clearly.
什么是公平？像约翰·罗尔斯这样的哲学家提出了公式。一个简单的版本是：公平 = 平等 + 需求 − 偏见。平等意味着每个人都拥有相同的基本权利。需求意味着处境更差的人可能需要额外的支持。偏见必须被移除，才能清晰地看待情况。
For example, when cutting a cake, equality says everyone gets an equal slice. But a need adjustment might give a larger slice to someone who hasn't eaten all day. A bias adjustment stops you giving extra to your best friend just because you like them.
例如，在切蛋糕时，平等要求每人得到同等大小的一块。但需求调整可能会让一整天没吃东西的人得到一块更大的。偏见调整则阻止你仅仅因为喜欢最好的朋友就多给他一块。
10. The Critical Thinking Cycle | 批判性思维循环
Philosophy is not a one‑time answer but an ongoing process of improvement. The critical thinking cycle: Observe → Question → Analyse → Evaluate → Conclude → Reflect. Then begin again with new observations.
哲学不是一次性的答案，而是一个不断改进的过程。批判性思维循环为：观察 → 提问 → 分析 → 评估 → 得出结论 → 反思。然后根据新的观察重新开始。
By repeating this cycle, you grow wiser over time. Each loop strengthens your ability to think clearly and argue fairly. This is the master formula behind all philosophical inquiry.
通过重复这个循环，你会随着时间的推移变得更加明智。每一圈都会增强你清晰思考和公正论证的能力。这是所有哲学探究背后的总公式。
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