What does the AQA Philosophy of religion section cover?

It covers six topics: the ontological, cosmological and teleological arguments for God; the problem of evil and suffering with theodicies; the nature and value of religious experience; the problem of religious language; the concept of miracle; and the self, death and the afterlife. It forms half of Component 1 alongside ethics, and questions reward naming thinkers precisely and evaluating the main criticisms.

Which thinkers must I be able to name in this section?

Anselm and Kant on the ontological argument; Aquinas, Hume and Russell on the cosmological argument; Paley, Hume and Dawkins on design; Augustine, Irenaeus, Hick and Mackie on evil; James, Otto and Swinburne on religious experience; Ayer, Flew, Aquinas, Tillich and Wittgenstein on language; Hume, Aquinas, Swinburne and Wiles on miracles; and Plato, Descartes and Dawkins on the soul.

How is the Philosophy of religion section examined?

It is assessed in Component 1 (Philosophy of religion and ethics), a 3-hour written paper worth 50 percent of the A-Level. Questions are split between AO1 (knowledge and understanding, including explaining a thinker or argument) and AO2 (analysis and evaluation, typically a 25-mark essay assessing a claim). Mark schemes reward accurate use of named scholars and a sustained, balanced argument leading to a justified conclusion.

What is the difference between AO1 and AO2 in this section?

AO1 questions ask you to explain or examine, for example explaining Aquinas's cosmological argument or examining the verification principle, and reward accurate, well-structured knowledge. AO2 questions ask you to assess or evaluate a claim, for example whether the problem of evil disproves God, and reward weighing arguments against each other and reaching a reasoned judgement rather than just listing views.

How should I revise the Philosophy of religion section?

Build a thinker grid for each topic with the position, the argument and the standard criticisms, then practise turning it into both AO1 explanations and AO2 essays. Learn paired criticisms precisely (Kant on the ontological argument, Hume on design and miracles, Mackie on the inconsistent triad), and rehearse full 25-mark essays under timed conditions, because evaluation is where the highest marks and the biggest weaknesses lie.

EnglandReligious Studies

AQA A-Level Religious Studies 3.1 Philosophy of religion: a complete overview of arguments, evil, experience, language, miracles and the afterlife

A deep-dive AQA A-Level Religious Studies guide to the Philosophy of religion section. Covers the arguments for God, evil and suffering, religious experience, religious language, miracles and life after death, with the thinkers, criticisms and AS-versus-A2 split that AQA examines.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.822 min read3.1Updated 2026-06-02

Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed

Jump to a section

What the Philosophy of religion section demands
The arguments for God and the problem of evil
Religious experience and religious language
Miracles and the afterlife
How the Philosophy of religion section is examined
Check your knowledge

What the Philosophy of religion section demands

Philosophy of religion is one of the two halves of Component 1 (the other is ethics). It asks whether belief in God is rational: whether God's existence can be argued for, whether evil and suffering count against it, whether experience and miracles support it, whether we can even speak meaningfully about God, and what becomes of the self at death. The examiners test two linked skills: precise recall of named thinkers and their arguments (AO1), and the confident weighing of those arguments to reach a justified conclusion (AO2).

This guide walks through all six topics in specification order, then sets out the exam patterns AQA repeats. Each topic has a matching dot-point page with practice questions; this overview ties them together.

The arguments for God and the problem of evil

The arguments for the existence of God divide into the a priori ontological argument (Anselm: God is "that than which nothing greater can be conceived"; refuted by Kant's claim that existence is not a predicate) and the a posteriori cosmological argument (Aquinas's first three Ways, attacked by Hume and Russell) and teleological argument (Paley's watch, undercut by Hume and by Darwin and Dawkins).

Evil and suffering poses the strongest challenge. The logical problem (Mackie's inconsistent triad: omnipotence, omnibenevolence and evil cannot all be true) and the evidential problem are answered by theodicies: Augustine (evil is a privation, the result of the Fall and free will) and Irenaeus developed by Hick (evil enables soul-making in a world of epistemic distance).

Religious experience and religious language

Religious experience asks whether a direct encounter with the divine is evidence for God. William James gives four marks of mysticism (ineffability, noetic quality, transiency, passivity); Otto describes the numinous; Swinburne uses the principles of credulity and testimony to make experience probabilistic evidence; Freud and neurological accounts offer naturalistic challenges.

Religious language asks whether talk of God is even meaningful. The verification principle (Ayer) and falsification challenge (Flew) attack it as cognitively empty, while the via negativa, Aquinas's analogy, Tillich's symbol and Wittgenstein's language games defend its meaningfulness in different ways.

Miracles and the afterlife

Miracles turns on Hume's definition (a transgression of a law of nature by the volition of the Deity) and his twin critique (the balance of probability and the unreliability of witnesses), set against Aquinas's broader account, Swinburne's defence and Wiles's objection that selective miracles make God arbitrary.

The self, death and the afterlife topic contrasts dualism (Plato's immortal soul, Descartes's thinking substance) with materialism (Dawkins), and assesses the coherence of disembodied existence, reincarnation, rebirth and bodily resurrection (with Hick's replica theory).

How the Philosophy of religion section is examined

A typical AQA profile:

AO1 explanation. Explaining a named argument or theory: Aquinas's cosmological Ways, the verification principle, James's marks of mysticism, or Descartes's dualism.
AO1 examination. Setting out a debate accurately, for example the theodicies of Augustine and Irenaeus, or Hume's two arguments against miracles.
AO2 evaluation. A 25-mark essay assessing a claim, such as "The problem of evil makes belief in God irrational" or "Religious language is meaningless".
Synoptic links. Connecting topics, for example evil and miracles (both about God's action), or experience and language (both about how we access and describe God).

Check your knowledge

A mix of recall and evaluation prompts covering the Philosophy of religion section. Attempt them under timed conditions, then check against the solutions.

State Anselm's definition of God and Kant's objection to the ontological argument. (3 marks)
Outline Mackie's inconsistent triad. (3 marks)
State James's four marks of mysticism. (4 marks)
Explain the verification principle and one weakness of it. (4 marks)
State Hume's definition of a miracle and his a priori argument against believing in them. (4 marks)
Distinguish substance dualism from materialism about the person. (3 marks)
Explain how the Irenaean theodicy differs from the Augustinian theodicy. (4 marks)
Explain Swinburne's principle of credulity. (3 marks)

Solutions

Q1: Anselm defines God as "that than which nothing greater can be conceived", arguing that a being existing in reality is greater than one existing only in the mind. Kant objects that existence is not a predicate: saying a thing exists adds nothing to its concept, so a "God who exists" is not a greater idea, only a claimed instance.
Q2: Mackie argues the three claims that God is omnipotent, God is wholly good, and evil exists are logically inconsistent: a good, all-powerful God would both want and be able to remove evil, so the existence of evil disproves such a God unless one claim is qualified.
Q3: Ineffability (beyond words), noetic quality (gives knowledge), transiency (short-lived), passivity (the subject feels acted upon).
Q4: The verification principle (Ayer) holds a statement is meaningful only if it is analytic or empirically verifiable, so "God exists" is dismissed as factually meaningless. A weakness is that the principle is itself neither analytic nor empirically verifiable, so by its own test it is meaningless.
Q5: A miracle is "a transgression of a law of nature brought about by a particular volition of the Deity". Hume's a priori argument is that the uniform experience supporting a law always outweighs the testimony for its violation, so a wise person proportions belief to the evidence and rejects the miracle.
Q6: Substance dualism (Descartes) holds the person is a non-physical mind distinct from the body, which can survive bodily death. Materialism holds the person is wholly physical, so mental states are brain states and identity ends with the brain.
Q7: The Augustinian theodicy is "soul-deciding": evil is a privation entering a perfect creation through the misuse of free will at the Fall, and God is not responsible. The Irenaean theodicy (developed by Hick) is "soul-making": God deliberately makes an imperfect world at an epistemic distance so that humans can freely grow into God's likeness, so evil has a constructive purpose.
Q8: The principle of credulity states that, in the absence of special reasons to doubt, we should believe that things are as they seem to be, which makes a religious experience evidence for God.

Sources & how we know this

AQA A-level Religious Studies (7062) specification — AQA (2016)