Philosophy of religion — OCR A-Level Religious Studies Revision

    This topic covers the philosophical arguments for and against the existence of God, focusing on a posteriori arguments (teleological and cosmological) and

    Topic Synopsis

    This topic covers the philosophical arguments for and against the existence of God, focusing on a posteriori arguments (teleological and cosmological) and a priori arguments (ontological), alongside challenges to these arguments.

    Key Concepts & Core Principles

    Exam Tips & Revision Strategies

    Common Misconceptions & Mistakes to Avoid

    Examiner Marking Points

    Philosophy of religion

    OCR
    A-Level

    This topic covers the philosophical arguments for and against the existence of God, focusing on a posteriori arguments (teleological and cosmological) and a priori arguments (ontological), alongside challenges to these arguments.

    0
    Objectives
    25
    Exam Tips
    24
    Pitfalls
    0
    Key Terms
    36
    Mark Points

    Subtopics in this area

    The Existence of God
    Theological and Philosophical Developments
    Philosophical Language and Thought
    God and the World
    Religious Language: Negative, Analogical or Symbolic
    Religious Language: Twentieth Century Perspectives

    Topic Overview

    Philosophy of religion is a core component of OCR A-Level Religious Studies, exploring fundamental questions about the existence and nature of God, the problem of evil, and the relationship between faith and reason. This topic critically examines arguments for and against theism, including the ontological, cosmological, and teleological arguments, as well as challenges from atheism and the problem of evil. Students engage with key philosophers such as Anselm, Aquinas, Paley, Hume, and Kant, developing analytical skills to evaluate the coherence and validity of these arguments.

    Understanding philosophy of religion is essential because it underpins many ethical and theological debates in the modern world. It encourages critical thinking about ultimate questions, such as whether religious belief is rational and how we can reconcile the existence of suffering with a benevolent God. This topic also connects to broader themes in religious studies, such as the nature of religious language and the relationship between science and religion, providing a foundation for further study in theology, philosophy, or ethics.

    In the OCR A-Level exam, philosophy of religion is assessed through essay-based questions that require students to present balanced arguments, use scholarly perspectives, and reach reasoned conclusions. Mastery of this topic involves not only memorising key arguments but also evaluating their strengths and weaknesses, applying them to contemporary issues, and demonstrating awareness of different philosophical traditions. This topic is typically studied alongside ethics and developments in Christian thought, forming a coherent and challenging curriculum.

    Key Concepts

    Core ideas you must understand for this topic

    • →The Ontological Argument: An a priori argument that God's existence is necessary by definition, proposed by Anselm and later refined by Descartes, with criticisms from Kant (existence is not a predicate) and Gaunilo (the perfect island objection).
    • →The Cosmological Argument: An a posteriori argument based on contingency or causation, including Aquinas' Third Way (contingent beings require a necessary being) and the Kalam argument (the universe began to exist, so it has a cause). Criticised by Hume (no necessary connection) and Russell (the universe is just there).
    • →The Teleological Argument: An a posteriori argument from design, including Paley's watchmaker analogy and Aquinas' Fifth Way. Criticised by Hume (analogy is weak, multiple designers possible) and Darwin's theory of evolution by natural selection.
    • →The Problem of Evil: The logical and evidential problem of evil, challenging the existence of an omnipotent, omnibenevolent God. Responses include the Free Will Defence (Augustine, Irenaeus), soul-making theodicy (Hick), and process theology. Criticised by Mackie (inconsistent triad) and Rowe (evidential problem).
    • →Religious Language: The debate over whether language about God is meaningful, including verificationism (Ayer), falsificationism (Flew), and alternative approaches such as analogy (Aquinas), symbol (Tillich), and language games (Wittgenstein).

    What You Need to Demonstrate

    Key skills and knowledge for this topic

    • Details of the teleological argument including Aquinas’ Fifth Way and Paley
    • Details of the cosmological argument including Aquinas’ first three ways
    • Details of Hume’s criticisms of arguments from natural religion
    • The challenge of evolution to teleological arguments
    • Details of the ontological argument including Anselm
    • Gaunilo’s criticisms of the ontological argument
    • Kant’s criticisms of the ontological argument
    • Understanding of divine power and self-imposed limitation

    Marking Points

    Key points examiners look for in your answers

    • Details of the teleological argument including Aquinas’ Fifth Way and Paley
    • Details of the cosmological argument including Aquinas’ first three ways
    • Details of Hume’s criticisms of arguments from natural religion
    • The challenge of evolution to teleological arguments
    • Details of the ontological argument including Anselm
    • Gaunilo’s criticisms of the ontological argument
    • Kant’s criticisms of the ontological argument
    • Understanding of divine power and self-imposed limitation
    • Analysis of divine knowledge in relation to temporal existence and free will
    • Evaluation of Boethius’s argument on divine foreknowledge, eternity, and free will
    • Explanation of Anselm’s four-dimensionalist approach as an extension of Boethius
    • Assessment of the compatibility of human free will with divine attributes
    • Plato's understanding of reality, the Forms, and the analogy of the cave.
    • Aristotle's understanding of reality, the four causes, and the Prime Mover.
    • Plato's view of the soul as essential and immaterial, temporarily united with the body.
    • Aristotle's view of the soul as the form of the body, inseparable from it.
    • Metaphysics of consciousness and materialist critiques of dualism.
    • Comparison of Plato's rationalism and Aristotle's empiricism.
    • Comparison of Plato's Form of the Good and Aristotle's Prime Mover.
    • Demonstrate knowledge of mystical and conversion experiences
    • Explain the views of William James on religious experience
    • Analyze different understandings of religious experience (union with a greater power, psychological, physiological)
    • Explain the logical and evidential aspects of the problem of evil
    • Explain theodicies that propose justifications for divine action or inaction in the face of evil
    • Reference to Augustine and Hick regarding the problem of evil
    • Understanding of the apophatic way (via negativa) as an approach to theological language.
    • Understanding of the cataphatic way (via positiva) as an approach to theological language.
    • Explanation of Aquinas’s analogy of attribution and analogy of proper proportion.
    • Explanation of Tillich’s view of theological language as symbolic.
    • Ability to compare and contrast the usefulness of negative, analogical, and symbolic approaches.
    • Evaluation of whether religious language is comprehensible if understood symbolically or analogically.
    • Impact of the verification principle (Ayer) on religious language
    • Wittgenstein’s concept of language games and forms of life
    • The falsification symposium (Flew, Hare, Mitchell) and the factual quality of religious language
    • Comparison of cognitive vs non-cognitive approaches
    • Comparison of Aquinas (analogy) and Wittgenstein (language games)

    Examiner Tips

    Expert advice for maximising your marks

    • 💡Ensure clear distinction between a posteriori and a priori styles of argument
    • 💡Use scholarly views to support arguments, such as Dawkins or Plantinga
    • 💡Focus on the logical fallacies within the arguments
    • 💡Evaluate whether existence can be treated as a predicate
    • 💡Ensure you can compare the different understandings of the relationship between divinity and time
    • 💡Use specific terminology when discussing divine attributes (e.g., omniscience, omnipotence, eternity)
    • 💡Focus on the coherence of theism when evaluating whether these attributes can reasonably coexist
    • 💡Refer to the specific works of Boethius, Anselm, and Swinburne to support your arguments
    • 💡Ensure clear distinction between Plato's and Aristotle's approaches to reality.
    • 💡Use scholarly views to support arguments regarding dualism and materialism.
    • 💡Be prepared to discuss whether the concept of the soul is metaphorical or a reality.
    • 💡Focus on the 'why' behind the philosophical arguments, not just the 'what'.
    • 💡Ensure you can clearly distinguish between mystical and conversion experiences
    • 💡Be prepared to evaluate whether personal testimony is sufficient to support the validity of religious experiences
    • 💡Practice comparing the logical and evidential problems of evil
    • 💡Use specific scholarly views (e.g., William James, Augustine, Hick) to support your analysis
    • 💡Focus on the debate regarding whether corporate religious experiences are more reliable than individual ones
    • 💡Ensure you can define and use the technical terms 'via negativa' and 'via positiva' accurately.
    • 💡When discussing Aquinas, focus on how analogy bridges the gap between human language and the divine.
    • 💡When discussing Tillich, emphasize the distinction between a sign and a symbol.
    • 💡Practice comparing these approaches to determine which is more effective for expressing religious truth.
    • 💡Ensure clear definitions of cognitive and non-cognitive language
    • 💡Use the specific parables (Flew's gardener, Hare's lunatic, Mitchell's partisan) to illustrate the falsification debate
    • 💡Focus on the shift from 'what does it mean' to 'how does it function' in language
    • 💡Evaluate the effectiveness of the verification principle in rendering religious language meaningless
    • 💡Always evaluate arguments explicitly. Use phrases like 'This is a strength because...' and 'However, a weakness is...' to show critical analysis. Avoid simply describing arguments without assessing them.
    • 💡Use scholarly references to support your points. For example, mention Kant's objection to the ontological argument, Hume's criticisms of the cosmological argument, or Plantinga's free will defence. This demonstrates depth of knowledge and engagement with academic debate.
    • 💡Structure your essays with a clear introduction, balanced paragraphs, and a conclusion that answers the question directly. Use the 'PEEL' method (Point, Evidence, Explanation, Link) to ensure each paragraph is focused and coherent.

    Common Mistakes

    Pitfalls to avoid in your exam answers

    • Confusing a posteriori and a priori arguments
    • Failing to distinguish between the logical and evidential aspects of arguments
    • Misunderstanding the role of predicates in Kant's critique of the ontological argument
    • Over-simplifying Hume's criticisms of natural religion
    • Failing to distinguish between the different philosophical approaches to divine eternity
    • Confusing the logical possibility of divine attributes with divine self-limitation
    • Inability to clearly articulate the conflict between divine foreknowledge and human free will
    • Superficial evaluation of the key thinkers (Boethius, Anselm, Swinburne)
    • Confusing the four causes of Aristotle.
    • Misunderstanding the relationship between the soul and body in Plato versus Aristotle.
    • Failing to distinguish between rationalism and empiricism in the context of these philosophers.
    • Treating the analogy of the cave as a literal description rather than a philosophical tool.
    • Confusing the logical and evidential aspects of the problem of evil
    • Failing to link theodicies directly to the specific challenges of evil and suffering
    • Over-generalizing religious experiences without reference to specific types (mystical/conversion)
    • Neglecting to use scholarly views to support arguments
    • Confusing the via negativa with a simple denial of God's existence.
    • Failing to clearly distinguish between Aquinas's analogy of attribution and analogy of proper proportion.
    • Misinterpreting Tillich's view of symbols as merely 'signs' or 'metaphors' without understanding his specific definition of participation.
    • Struggling to evaluate the effectiveness of these approaches in the context of modern philosophical challenges.
    • Confusing verification with falsification
    • Failing to distinguish between cognitive and non-cognitive approaches
    • Misunderstanding the purpose of the parables used in the falsification symposium
    • Treating language games as merely a way to avoid answering questions about truth
    • Misconception: The ontological argument proves God's existence. Correction: While it is logically valid, many philosophers (e.g., Kant) argue it is unsound because existence is not a property that adds to a concept. The argument is a priori and relies on the definition of God, but it does not convince everyone.
    • Misconception: The problem of evil disproves God's existence. Correction: The problem of evil presents a strong challenge, but theodicies (e.g., Free Will Defence, soul-making) offer possible explanations. The logical problem (inconsistent triad) has been largely refuted by Alvin Plantinga's free will defence, though the evidential problem remains powerful.
    • Misconception: Hume completely destroyed the design argument. Correction: Hume's criticisms are devastating to Paley's analogy, but the argument can be reformulated (e.g., fine-tuning argument). Hume himself did not claim to disprove design; he argued that the evidence is insufficient for a definitive conclusion.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Common questions students ask about this topic

    Before You Start

    Prior knowledge that will help with this topic

    • •A basic understanding of the nature of God (omnipotence, omnibenevolence, omniscience) is essential, as these attributes are central to many arguments.
    • •Familiarity with key philosophical terms such as a priori, a posteriori, necessary, contingent, and analytic/synthetic will help you engage with the arguments more effectively.
    • •An awareness of the historical context of philosophy (e.g., medieval, Enlightenment) can provide useful background for understanding why certain arguments were developed.

    Likely Command Words

    How questions on this topic are typically asked

    Discuss
    Evaluate
    Compare
    Analyze
    Assess
    Examine
    Analyse
    Explain
    To what extent

    Ready to test yourself?

    Practice questions tailored to this topic

    Related Topics in OCR A-Level Religious Studies

    Religion and ethics

    View Topic

    Developments in Buddhist thought

    View Topic

    Developments in Christian thought

    View Topic

    Developments in Hindu thought

    View Topic