Ethics and religion: Conscience — AQA A-Level Religious Studies
Ethics and religion: Conscience explained
Ethics and religion: Conscience covers 5 specification points, including Differing ideas, religious and non-religious,… and The role of conscience in making moral….
Read the full explanation
Open a point below for its explanation and revision guidance.
Differing ideas, religious and non-religious, about the nature of conscience.
This topic asks you to compare accounts of what conscience actually is. Religious views include the idea that conscience is the voice of God guiding moral choice, or a God-given faculty that humans develop through reason and community. Non-religious views include the Freudian account of conscience as the internalised superego formed by parental and social authority, and the behaviourist account of conscience as learned conditioning and social training. Other secular approaches treat conscience as a form of moral intuition or as reasoned moral judgement. For multiple-choice questions, identify which thinker or tradition each description belongs to, and separate the claim about the source of conscience from the claim about its reliability.
The role of conscience in making moral decisions with reference to:
This criterion asks you to examine how conscience functions when people make moral decisions, applying the idea to three specified issues: telling lies, breaking promises and adultery. Begin by explaining what conscience is taken to be, for example an inner sense of right and wrong, a rational faculty or a voice shaped by upbringing and belief. Then show how conscience might guide or fail to guide a decision in each case. With telling lies, ask whether conscience alerts you to the harm a lie causes. With breaking promises, ask whether conscience registers the breach of trust. With adultery, ask whether conscience condemns the betrayal of a partner. In each case weigh whether conscience gives reliable guidance or is shaped by culture and self-interest, and reach a reasoned conclusion about its role.
telling lies and breaking promises
This topic sits within conscience, so the analysis must connect lying and promise-breaking to a theory of how conscience works, not just to general ethics. A response should first define what a lie is (a deliberate false statement intended to deceive) and what breaking a promise is (failing to keep a freely undertaken commitment), then show how a chosen conscience account judges each. On a naturalistic, reason-based view such as Piaget's or Kohlberg's developmental account, conscience is formed through moral development, so lying and promise-breaking are assessed by the level of reasoning behind them and their effect on trust and social cooperation. On a religious view such as Newman's, conscience is the voice of God, so these acts are judged against an inner sense of duty before God.
adultery.
Adultery appears in the conscience section, so the response must connect it to an account of how conscience works rather than treat it only as a general moral issue. A response should define adultery (a married person having a sexual relationship with someone other than their spouse) and then apply a chosen conscience theory. On a naturalistic, reason-based view such as Kohlberg's developmental account, conscience is formed through moral reasoning, so adultery is judged by the level of reasoning and the harm to trust and commitments. On a religious view such as Newman's, conscience is the voice of God, so adultery is judged as a breach of a vow made before God. A response should weigh whether either account gives clear and consistent guidance, consider a difficult case such as an unhappy marriage, and reach a justified conclusion.
The value of conscience as a moral guide.
This topic asks you to weigh conscience as a guide to moral choice, not merely to describe theories of it. Set out what conscience is taken to be: an inner sense of right and wrong, a rational faculty of moral judgement, or a voice attributed to God or to upbringing and society. Then assess its value. A strong answer asks whether conscience reliably tracks the good, whether it can be mistaken or distorted, and whether it gives clear guidance in hard cases. Use a concrete example: a person who feels a strong inner conviction that an act is wrong, yet cannot give reasons others would accept. Ask whether that conviction is a trustworthy guide or merely a feeling. Consider strengths (it is personal, immediate and motivating) against weaknesses (it varies between people, can be shaped by prejudice, and offers no shared standard for resolving disagreement).
Your focus
- Distinguish religious from non-religious accounts of the nature of conscience
- Match named thinkers and traditions to their account of conscience
- Explain why accounts differ over the origin of conscience
Show all 15 objectives
- Explain the role of conscience in making moral decisions.
- Apply the idea of conscience to telling lies, breaking promises and adultery.
- Assess how far conscience gives reliable moral guidance and reach a reasoned judgement.
- Apply a named account of conscience to judging lying and promise-breaking.
- Explain how reason-based and God-given conscience accounts differ in judging these acts.
- Reach a justified conclusion on lying and promise-breaking using a conscience theory.
- Apply a named account of conscience to judging adultery.
- Explain how reason-based and God-given conscience accounts differ in judging adultery.
- Reach a justified conclusion on adultery using a conscience theory.
- Explain at least two accounts of what conscience is.
- Assess the reliability of conscience as a guide using a concrete example.
- Reach and justify a judgement on how far conscience should be trusted.
Ethics and religion: Conscience exam tips
Marking Points
- Identifies the religious view that conscience is the voice of God or a God-given capacity for moral discernment
- Distinguishes the Freudian account of conscience as the internalised superego from religious accounts
- Recognises the behaviourist account of conscience as learned through conditioning and social reinforcement
- Separates claims about the origin of conscience from claims about whether conscience is a reliable guide
- Matches each named thinker or tradition to the account of conscience they defend
- Explains what conscience is understood to be and how it is claimed to guide moral decision-making.
- Applies the role of conscience to telling lies, considering whether it reliably identifies the wrong involved.
- Applies the role of conscience to breaking promises, considering whether it registers the breach of trust.
- Applies the role of conscience to adultery, considering whether it condemns the betrayal involved.
- Weighs whether conscience gives reliable guidance or is shaped by upbringing, culture and self-interest, reaching a reasoned judgement.
- Defines lying and promise-breaking precisely before applying any conscience theory, so the analysis rests on clear terms.
- Links the judgement of lying and promise-breaking explicitly to a named conscience account, such as a developmental or a God-given conscience.
- Explains how a reason-based conscience judges a lie by the reasoning behind it and its effect on trust and cooperation.
- Explains how a religious conscience, understood as the voice of God, judges lying and promise-breaking as a breach of duty.
- Uses a concrete case, such as a lie told to protect someone, to test whether the chosen account gives clear guidance.
- Weighs strengths and weaknesses of the conscience account before reaching a justified conclusion on these acts.
- Defines adultery precisely before applying any conscience theory, so the analysis rests on clear terms.
- Links the judgement of adultery explicitly to a named conscience account, such as a developmental or a God-given conscience.
- Explains how a reason-based conscience judges adultery by the reasoning behind it and the harm to trust and commitments.
- Explains how a religious conscience, understood as the voice of God, judges adultery as a breach of a vow made before God.
- Considers a difficult case, such as an unhappy marriage, to test whether the chosen account gives clear guidance.
- Weighs strengths and weaknesses of the conscience account before reaching a justified conclusion on adultery.
- Explains what conscience is taken to be, distinguishing an inner moral sense from a rational faculty of judgement and from a voice attributed to God or to society.
- Assesses whether conscience reliably identifies what is morally right, rather than merely describing that people have strong feelings.
- Uses a concrete example to test whether an inner conviction is a trustworthy guide when the person cannot give reasons others would accept.
- Weighs the strengths of conscience as personal, immediate and motivating against its weaknesses as variable, open to distortion and lacking a shared standard.
- Reaches a reasoned judgement about how far conscience should be trusted as a moral guide, rather than listing views without conclusion.
Examiner Tips
- 💡Read the stem carefully to see whether it asks about the source or the reliability of conscience
- 💡Link each option to a named thinker or tradition before choosing
- 💡Eliminate options that merge a religious source with a secular explanation
- 💡Address all three specified issues explicitly, naming telling lies, breaking promises and adultery, so no required application is missed.
- 💡For each issue, state what conscience is claimed to do and then assess whether that claim holds.
- 💡Conclude with a judgement about how far conscience can be relied on in making moral decisions, drawing the three applications together.
- 💡Anchor every paragraph to the conscience section by naming the theory you are applying.
- 💡Use one concrete example, such as a protective lie, to show how the theory judges the act.
- 💡Reserve time to weigh the theory and state a justified conclusion rather than only describing it.
- 💡Anchor every paragraph to the conscience section by naming the theory you are applying.
- 💡Use one difficult case, such as an unhappy marriage, to show how the theory judges adultery.
- 💡Reserve time to weigh the theory and state a justified conclusion rather than only describing it.
- 💡Define what you mean by conscience early, because the assessment of its value depends on that definition.
- 💡Use one worked example to test reliability rather than piling up abstract claims.
- 💡Signal your judgement explicitly, for example by weighing which weakness most undermines conscience as a guide.
Common Mistakes
- Treats all religious accounts of conscience as identical; distinguish the voice-of-God view from a reason-and-community view
- Confuses the Freudian superego with a God-given faculty; keep the psychological and theological sources separate
- Assumes a non-religious account must deny that conscience exists; recognise that secular views explain its origin differently
- Discusses thinkers or traditions in general without applying conscience to telling lies, breaking promises and adultery; anchor each point in one of the three specified issues.
- Assumes conscience always gives correct guidance without questioning its reliability; weigh the possibility that it is shaped by culture or self-interest.
- Treats the three issues as interchangeable; give each its own example and explain the distinct moral wrong conscience is said to detect.
- Treats lying and promise-breaking as general ethics without linking them to a conscience theory; connect each act to a named account of conscience.
- Assumes every conscience account condemns all lies equally; distinguish reason-based and God-given accounts and their different judgements.
- Offers a conclusion with no weighing of the theory; justify the conclusion by comparing the strengths and weaknesses of the account used.
- Treats adultery as general ethics without linking it to a conscience theory; connect the act to a named account of conscience.
- Assumes every conscience account judges adultery identically; distinguish reason-based and God-given accounts and their reasoning.
- Offers a conclusion with no weighing of the theory; justify the conclusion by comparing the strengths and weaknesses of the account used.
- Describes theories of conscience without assessing its value; keep the focus on whether it is a reliable guide.
- Treats conscience as automatically correct because it feels strong; examine whether strong feeling can be mistaken or shaped by prejudice.
- Lists strengths and weaknesses without reaching a judgement; close with a reasoned view on how far conscience should be trusted.