Works of scholars: Critiques of religious belief (Dawkins and Westphal; Russell and Copleston) — Edexcel A-Level Religious Studies

This topic explores critiques of religious belief from key scholars: Richard Dawkins and Merold Westphal on the nature of religious belief, and Bertrand Russell and F.C. Copleston on the cosmological argument. Students must understand the philosophical and theological debates, including Dawkins' scientific atheism, Westphal's postmodern critique, Russell's rejection of the cosmological argument, and Copleston's defence of it.

This topic examines critiques of religious belief from four key scholars: Richard Dawkins, Merold Westphal, Bertrand Russell, and F.C. Copleston. Dawkins represents a scientific atheism that dismisses religious belief as a delusion, while Westphal offers a postmodern critique of the Enlightenment's rationalism, arguing that religious belief is a legitimate form of knowledge. Russell and Copleston engage in a classic philosophical debate about the cosmological argument, with Russell rejecting the need for a first cause and Copleston defending it.

Understanding these critiques is essential for A-Level Religious Studies because they challenge students to think critically about the rationality of religious belief. The topic also highlights the difference between scientific, philosophical, and postmodern critiques, and how each approach has its strengths and weaknesses. Students must be able to compare and contrast these scholars' views and evaluate their arguments.

This topic fits into the wider theme of challenges to religious belief, alongside other critiques such as the problem of evil and secularisation. It also connects to the study of arguments for God's existence, as Russell and Copleston's debate is a direct response to the cosmological argument.

• →Dawkins' 'God Hypothesis' and the idea that religion is a delusion
• →Westphal's critique of Enlightenment rationalism and his defence of religious belief as a form of knowledge
• →Russell's 'brute fact' objection and his rejection of the principle of sufficient reason
• →Copleston's defence of the cosmological argument using the principle of sufficient reason and the concept of a necessary being
• →The distinction between scientific, philosophical, and postmodern critiques of religion

• Understanding of the respective strengths and weaknesses of religious beliefs.
• Ability to discuss alternative explanations for religious phenomena.
• Engagement with issues of probability and postmodern interpretations of religion.
• Knowledge of key terms, types of atheism, and agnosticism.
• Understanding of the context of the writings of Russell and Copleston.
• Application of Russell and Copleston's ideas to the argument from contingency.
• Application of Russell and Copleston's ideas to religious experience.

• 💡Ensure you can apply the ideas of Dawkins and Westphal to broader philosophical debates.
• 💡Use the anthology extracts to support your arguments in Section B.
• 💡Focus on the comparative aspect of the Russell and Copleston debate rather than just summarizing their individual views.
• 💡Use specialist terminology accurately when discussing atheism and agnosticism.
• 💡Use precise terminology: 'contingent', 'necessary', 'brute fact', 'principle of sufficient reason', 'delusion', 'postmodern'.
• 💡Always compare and contrast the scholars' views, showing how they respond to each other.
• 💡In evaluation questions, consider the strengths and weaknesses of each critique, and use scholarly quotes or examples to support your points.

• Failing to link the scholars' ideas to the specific arguments (contingency/religious experience).
• Describing the scholars' views without evaluating their strengths and weaknesses.
• Confusing the definitions of atheism and agnosticism.
• Neglecting the context of the debate between Russell and Copleston.
• Misconception: Dawkins and Westphal are both atheists who reject religion for the same reasons. Correction: Dawkins rejects religion on scientific grounds, while Westphal critiques the Enlightenment's rationalism but does not necessarily reject religious belief.
• Misconception: Russell and Copleston's debate is about whether God exists. Correction: The debate is specifically about the validity of the cosmological argument and the principle of sufficient reason.
• Misconception: The cosmological argument is a scientific proof for God. Correction: It is a philosophical argument based on reason, not empirical evidence.

1. 1Week 1: Read and take notes on Dawkins' 'The God Delusion' (chapters on the God Hypothesis and the roots of religion) and Westphal's 'Suspicion and Faith' (introduction and key chapters).
2. 2Week 2: Study the Russell-Copleston debate (listen to the BBC radio debate or read transcripts). Summarise each scholar's key arguments.
3. 3Week 3: Create a comparison table of the four scholars, focusing on their critiques and responses.
4. 4Week 4: Practise exam questions, focusing on 6-mark 'explain' and 8-mark 'analyse' questions. Use mark schemes to self-assess.
5. 5Week 5: Review and memorise key quotes and terminology. Do active recall quizzes.

• 📋Explain questions (6 marks): e.g., 'Explain Dawkins' critique of religious belief.' – Provide a clear, structured explanation with examples.
• 📋Analyse questions (8 marks): e.g., 'Analyse Russell's objection to the cosmological argument.' – Break down the argument and evaluate its strengths.
• 📋Evaluate questions (12 marks): e.g., 'Evaluate the view that religious belief is irrational.' – Consider both sides and reach a justified conclusion.
• 📋Compare and contrast questions (10 marks): e.g., 'Compare Dawkins' and Westphal's critiques of religious belief.' – Show similarities and differences.