Religion and Ethics – Determinism and free will — Eduqas A-Level Religious Studies

Determinism and free will is a core topic in the WJEC A-Level Religious Studies specification, exploring whether human actions are predetermined or freely chosen. This debate sits at the heart of moral responsibility: if our choices are determined by prior causes (biological, environmental, or divine), can we be held morally accountable? The topic connects with philosophical, theological, and scientific perspectives, including hard determinism, libertarianism, and compatibilism. Students must evaluate key thinkers such as John Calvin (theological determinism), Jean-Paul Sartre (radical free will), and A.J. Ayer (soft determinism), while also engaging with challenges from quantum physics and neuroscience.

Understanding this debate is crucial because it shapes how we view ethics, law, and religion. For example, if determinism is true, retributive justice (punishment for wrongdoing) becomes problematic, whereas libertarian free will supports the idea of moral desert. The topic also intersects with the problem of evil: if God predestines some to salvation and others to damnation (as Calvin argued), does that make God unjust? Students must critically assess these implications, using scholarly interpretations and real-world examples such as addiction, coercion, or criminal behaviour.

Within the WJEC course, this topic is studied under 'Religion and Ethics' and often appears in essay questions requiring evaluation of different positions. Mastery of determinism and free will also supports other themes like conscience, moral absolutism, and religious experience. A strong answer will demonstrate knowledge of key terminology (e.g., causal determinism, indeterminism, moral responsibility), apply philosophical arguments (e.g., the consequence argument, the luck objection), and engage with religious perspectives (e.g., Arminianism vs. Calvinism).

• →Hard determinism: the view that all events, including human actions, are causally determined by prior factors, making free will an illusion. Key proponents: Baron d'Holbach, Paul Edwards.
• →Libertarianism (or metaphysical libertarianism): the belief that humans have genuine free will, which is incompatible with determinism. Key proponents: Jean-Paul Sartre, Peter van Inwagen.
• →Compatibilism (soft determinism): the position that free will and determinism can coexist, as long as actions are caused by internal desires and not external coercion. Key proponents: David Hume, A.J. Ayer.
• →Theological determinism: the belief that God predestines all events, including human salvation or damnation. Associated with John Calvin and the doctrine of predestination.
• →Moral responsibility: the idea that an agent is deserving of praise or blame for their actions, which is often considered to require free will. The debate centres on whether determinism undermines this.

• Religious concepts of predestination (Augustine and Calvin)
• Concepts of determinism (Hard and Soft)
• Implications of determinism on moral responsibility and religious belief
• Religious concepts of free will (Pelagius and Arminius)
• Concepts of libertarianism (Philosophical, Scientific, Psychological)
• Implications of libertarianism and free will on moral responsibility and religious belief

• 💡Ensure clear definitions of key terms like 'predestination', 'libertarianism', and 'concupiscence'
• 💡Use specific examples for each type of determinism (e.g., Locke's bedroom illustration for hard determinism)
• 💡Structure evaluation by comparing the coherence of religious views with scientific/psychological evidence
• 💡Address the impact of these theories on the concept of God (omnipotence/omnibenevolence)
• 💡Always define key terms (e.g., determinism, free will, moral responsibility) in your introduction. This shows the examiner you understand the precise philosophical meanings, not just everyday usage.
• 💡Use specific scholars and their arguments. For example, when discussing hard determinism, reference d'Holbach's 'The System of Nature' or Paul Edwards' 'Hard and Soft Determinism'. For libertarianism, mention Sartre's 'radical freedom' or van Inwagen's 'consequence argument'.
• 💡Structure your essay with a clear line of argument. For a question like 'Critically assess the view that free will is compatible with determinism', present compatibilism, then counterarguments (e.g., the manipulation argument), and finally your own evaluation. Always link back to the question.

• Confusing Hard Determinism with Soft Determinism
• Failing to distinguish between the theological views of Augustine and Calvin
• Misunderstanding the role of grace in Pelagian and Arminian thought
• Overlooking the implications of determinism for the problem of evil
• Misconception: 'If determinism is true, we cannot make choices at all.' Correction: Determinism does not mean we don't make choices; it means our choices are caused by prior factors. Compatibilists argue that as long as we act according to our own desires (without external coercion), we are free.
• Misconception: 'Quantum physics proves free will exists.' Correction: While quantum indeterminacy suggests randomness at the subatomic level, randomness does not equate to free will. Libertarians need a form of agency that is neither determined nor random, which quantum mechanics does not provide.
• Misconception: 'Predestination means God causes people to sin.' Correction: Calvinists argue that God ordains all events, but they distinguish between God's active will (causing good) and permissive will (allowing sin). However, critics like Jacobus Arminius argue this makes God the author of evil.