Normative ethical theories — AQA A-Level Religious Studies

Normative ethical theories are frameworks that prescribe how we ought to act, providing criteria for moral rightness. In AQA A-Level Religious Studies, the key theories are Natural Law, Situation Ethics, Kantian Ethics, and Utilitarianism, each offering distinct approaches to moral decision-making and evaluated for their coherence, practicality, and religious compatibility.

Normative ethical theories are the backbone of moral philosophy in A-Level Religious Studies. They provide systematic frameworks for determining what actions are right or wrong, going beyond mere opinion or cultural convention. In the AQA syllabus, you will study four major theories: Natural Law (Aquinas), Situation Ethics (Fletcher), Kantian Ethics (Kant), and Utilitarianism (Bentham and Mill). Each theory offers a distinct criterion for moral decision-making: Natural Law focuses on intrinsic purpose and reason, Situation Ethics on agape love, Kantian Ethics on duty and rationality, and Utilitarianism on the consequences of actions.

These theories are not just abstract; they are applied to contemporary moral issues such as euthanasia, abortion, and war, making them highly relevant. Understanding them is crucial for the 'Ethics' component of the exam, where you will be asked to explain, compare, and evaluate them. Moreover, these theories intersect with religious beliefs: Natural Law is rooted in Catholic theology, Situation Ethics has Christian origins, while Kant and Utilitarianism are secular but can be discussed in relation to religious ethics. Mastering these theories will enable you to construct coherent arguments and critically assess moral problems, a skill that is central to the A-Level assessment objectives.

The topic also encourages you to reflect on meta-ethical questions, such as whether moral truths exist objectively or are relative. By comparing the absolutist nature of Natural Law and Kantian Ethics with the relativist approach of Situation Ethics and Utilitarianism, you will develop a nuanced understanding of ethical reasoning. This foundation is essential for tackling essay questions that require you to analyse, evaluate, and synthesise different perspectives, and it will prepare you for the synoptic nature of the exam.

• →Natural Law: based on Aristotle's idea of purpose (telos) and Aquinas's Christian synthesis; primary and secondary precepts; real vs apparent goods; the doctrine of double effect.
• →Situation Ethics: Fletcher's agape-based theory; four working principles (pragmatism, relativism, positivism, personalism); six fundamental propositions; situationism as a middle way.
• →Kantian Ethics: deontological and absolutist; categorical imperative (universalisability, treat humanity as an end, act as if legislating in a kingdom of ends); hypothetical vs categorical imperatives; good will and duty.
• →Utilitarianism: consequentialist and teleological; Bentham's act utilitarianism with the hedonic calculus; Mill's rule utilitarianism and higher/lower pleasures; the principle of utility (greatest happiness).
• →Key evaluative concepts: absolutism vs relativism, deontology vs teleology, the role of reason vs emotion, and the relationship between ethics and religion.

• Understanding of deontological ethics (Natural Moral Law and the principle of double effect with reference to Aquinas; Proportionalism)
• Understanding of teleological ethics (Situation Ethics with reference to Fletcher)
• Understanding of character-based ethics (Virtue Ethics with reference to Aristotle)
• Ability to compare differing approaches to moral decision-making
• Application of these theories to theft and lying
• Application of Natural Moral Law, Situation Ethics, and Virtue Ethics to issues of human life and death (embryo research, cloning, designer babies, abortion, voluntary euthanasia, assisted suicide, capital punishment)
• Application of Natural Moral Law, Situation Ethics, and Virtue Ethics to issues of non-human life and death (use of animals as food, intensive farming, scientific procedures, cloning, blood sports, animals as a source of organs for transplants)
• Evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of these ways of making moral decisions

• 💡Ensure clear distinction between the three normative theories studied
• 💡Use specialist terminology accurately when discussing the theories
• 💡Structure AO2 responses to evaluate the strengths and weaknesses of each theory in the context of the specific moral issues
• 💡Practice applying the theories to the specific list of human and non-human life and death issues provided in the specification
• 💡Always define key terms precisely and use technical vocabulary (e.g., 'deontological', 'teleological', 'categorical imperative', 'agape') to demonstrate knowledge.
• 💡When evaluating, avoid simple 'for and against' lists; instead, weigh the strengths and weaknesses and reach a justified conclusion. Use scholars' views (e.g., Aquinas, Fletcher, Kant, Bentham, Mill) and consider counterarguments.
• 💡In application questions, ensure you apply the theory's principles to the specific issue, not just state the theory. For example, for euthanasia, explain how the primary precept of preservation of life would be applied, and consider the doctrine of double effect.

• Confusing the core principles of deontological and teleological theories
• Failing to apply the specific theories (Natural Moral Law, Situation Ethics, Virtue Ethics) to the required ethical issues
• Generalizing ethical arguments without referencing the specific scholars prescribed (Aquinas, Fletcher, Aristotle)
• Neglecting the application of these theories to both human and non-human life and death issues
• Misconception: Natural Law is simply a list of rules. Correction: It is a rational system based on the idea that humans have an intrinsic purpose (telos) and that moral laws are derived from natural inclinations, not arbitrary commands.
• Misconception: Situation Ethics is the same as antinomianism (no rules). Correction: Fletcher explicitly rejects antinomianism; he sees rules as helpful 'illuminators' but not absolute, and the only absolute is agape love.
• Misconception: Kant's ethics is just about following rules. Correction: It is about acting from duty and rationality, and the categorical imperative is a test for maxims, not a set of rules. It also respects persons as ends in themselves.

1. 1Week 1: Focus on Natural Law and Situation Ethics. Read your textbook, create flashcards for key terms (primary precepts, agape, etc.), and practice explaining each theory in your own words. Do past paper questions on these two.
2. 2Week 2: Study Kantian Ethics and Utilitarianism. Again, make notes and practice applying them to issues like lying, stealing, or punishment. Compare the four theories in a table.
3. 3Week 3: Consolidate by writing full essays on evaluation questions. Use the mark scheme to self-assess. Focus on common pitfalls like not explaining the theory fully or not evaluating.
4. 4Week 4: Do timed practice under exam conditions. Review your answers and identify weak areas. Use active recall to test yourself on key quotes and scholars.

• 📋Explain questions (e.g., 'Explain the main features of Natural Law') – ensure you give a detailed account with examples and use of technical terms.
• 📋Application questions (e.g., 'Discuss how Situation Ethics might be applied to the issue of divorce') – apply the theory's principles to the issue, showing how a follower would decide.
• 📋Evaluation questions (e.g., 'Evaluate the claim that Utilitarianism is the best approach to moral decision-making') – present arguments for and against, and reach a justified conclusion.
• 📋Comparison questions (e.g., 'Compare Kantian Ethics and Situation Ethics') – identify similarities and differences, and evaluate which is more convincing.