EnglandReligious StudiesSyllabus dot point

If our actions are fully determined by prior causes, genetics or conditioning, can we be morally responsible, and is praise, blame and punishment then unjust?

Component 3 determinism: hard determinism, philosophical determinism (Locke), scientific determinism and psychological behaviourism (Skinner), and the implications for moral responsibility, with strengths and weaknesses.

An Eduqas Component 3 (Religion and Ethics) guide to determinism. Covers hard determinism, philosophical determinism (Locke's locked-room thought experiment), scientific determinism (universal causation), and psychological behaviourism (Skinner's conditioning), and the implications for moral responsibility, praise, blame and punishment, with the evaluation the exam rewards.

Generated by Claude Opus 4.816 min answerUpdated 2026-06-02

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

Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page

Quick answer

Determinism is the view that every event, including human choice, is fully caused by prior events, so that given the past and the laws of nature, only one future is possible and we could never have done otherwise. Hard determinism draws the conclusion that free will is an illusion and moral responsibility is therefore impossible. Several forms appear in the Eduqas specification. Philosophical determinism holds that universal causation applies to human choices; John Locke's locked-room analogy illustrates it: a man wakes in a room locked from the outside, talks happily and chooses to stay, believing he is free, but in fact he could not have left, just as we feel free while our choices are determined. Scientific determinism holds that the universe is governed by causal laws (classically, Newtonian physics), so each state of the world follows necessarily from the one before, leaving no room for uncaused choice. Psychological behaviourism, especially B. F. Skinner (Beyond Freedom and Dignity), holds that human behaviour is shaped entirely by conditioning, particularly operant conditioning through reinforcement; freedom and dignity are illusions, and behaviour can be predicted and controlled by controlling the environment. The crucial implication is for moral responsibility: if no one could have done otherwise, then praise, blame, guilt and retributive punishment seem unjust. The main reply is compatibilism, which argues that an action is free, and responsibility holds, when it flows from the agent's own uncompelled desires, even though those desires are caused. AO2 marks come from judging whether determinism removes moral responsibility, and concluding.

Jump to a section

What this dot point is asking
The answer
Examples in context
Try this

What this dot point is asking

Eduqas Component 3 (Theme 4, Determinism and Free Will) studies determinism: the view that every event, including human choice, is caused by prior events, so we could never have done otherwise. You learn hard determinism, philosophical determinism (Locke's locked-room analogy), scientific determinism (universal causation), and psychological behaviourism (Skinner's conditioning), and the implications for moral responsibility, praise, blame and punishment. The exam rewards explaining the positions precisely (AO1) and evaluating whether determinism removes moral responsibility (AO2).

The answer

Hard determinism

Philosophical determinism: Locke's locked room

Scientific determinism and Skinner's behaviourism

The implications for moral responsibility

The decisive issue is moral responsibility. If determinism is true and no one could have done otherwise, then holding people responsible, and the practices of praise, blame, guilt and retributive punishment that depend on desert, look unjust. Strengths of determinism: it fits the scientific picture of universal causation and the evidence that genetics and upbringing shape behaviour; it can make us less judgemental. Weaknesses: it conflicts with our strong intuition that we deliberate and could act otherwise; it seems to undermine the whole moral practice of responsibility; and (critics say) it is self-defeating if even our belief in determinism is merely caused.

Examples in context

Building an AO2 paragraph on whether determinism removes moral responsibility

step 1 State the claim precisely

State, do not narrate: "Hard determinism holds that since every choice is fully caused and we could never have done otherwise, no one is the ultimate author of their acts, so praise, blame, guilt and retributive punishment are unjust."

step 2 Put the strongest objection against it

Bring in the reply: "Compatibilism objects that this misdefines freedom: an act is free, and the agent responsible, when it flows from the agent's own uncompelled desires rather than external coercion, even if those desires are themselves caused, so we can be determined and yet responsible."

step 3 Weigh the exchange

Judge it: "Compatibilism rightly captures the everyday distinction between acting freely and being forced (the difference between paying a debt willingly and at gunpoint); but the hard determinist presses that if the desires themselves are fully caused, the agent could still never have done otherwise, so compatibilism may secure a thin freedom of action while leaving the deeper worry about ultimate authorship untouched."

step 4 Reach a justified conclusion

Close with a defended verdict: "Determinism threatens but does not clearly destroy moral responsibility: hard determinism follows logically only if responsibility requires the power to have done otherwise, whereas compatibilism redefines responsibility around uncompelled desire and preserves much of moral practice, so the verdict depends on which sense of 'could have done otherwise' responsibility really needs." A reasoned conclusion reaches the top band.

Try this

Q1. Explain Skinner's behaviourist account of human action. [part (a), AO1, 20 marks]

What the marker wants. Accurate account of operant conditioning and reinforcement, the claim that freedom and dignity are illusions, and the control of behaviour through the environment, organised and using specialist terms. AO1 band.

Q2. "Scientific determinism leaves no room for free will." Evaluate this view. [part (b), AO2, 30 marks]

Cue. Weigh the case for universal causation (and quantum or chaos-theory complications) against libertarian and compatibilist replies, and judge whether free will survives. AO2 band, the larger 30-mark tariff.

Exam-style practice questions

Practice questions written in the style of WJEC Eduqas exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.

Eduqas A120 2019 (style)20 marksExplain philosophical determinism (Locke) and psychological behaviourism (Skinner). [part (a), AO1, 20 marks]

Show worked answer →

A part (a) AO1 question on the five-band scheme. Explain both accurately.

Philosophical (hard) determinism: every event, including human choice, is fully caused by prior events, so we could never have done otherwise; free will is an illusion. Locke's locked-room analogy: a man wakes in a room locked from outside, chats happily and chooses to stay, believing he is free, but in fact he could not leave; we likewise feel free while our choices are determined. Scientific determinism: the universe is governed by causal laws (Newtonian physics), so every state follows necessarily from the previous one. Psychological behaviourism (Skinner, Beyond Freedom and Dignity): human behaviour is shaped by conditioning, operant conditioning through reinforcement; freedom and dignity are illusions, and behaviour can be controlled by controlling the environment. A top band answer explains the locked-room analogy and Skinner's conditioning.

Eduqas A120 2021 (style)20 marks"If determinism is true, no one can be held morally responsible." Evaluate this view. [part (b), AO2, the full Eduqas tariff is 30 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.]

Show worked answer →

A part (b) AO2 question; the top band rewards balanced argument and a justified conclusion.

For the view: hard determinism holds that if every act is caused and we could never do otherwise, then praise, blame, guilt and punishment (as desert) are unjust, since no one is truly the author of their acts; this seems to follow logically. Against: compatibilism argues an act is free, and responsibility holds, when it flows from the agent's own uncompelled desires, even if those are caused; libertarianism denies determinism for free choices; punishment can still be justified on deterrent or reform grounds. Weigh whether hard determinism really removes responsibility or whether compatibilism rescues it, and conclude. Links to libertarianism and predestination.

Related dot points

Sources & how we know this

Eduqas A Level Religious Studies specification (A120QS) — WJEC Eduqas (2016)
B. F. Skinner, Beyond Freedom and Dignity — Hackett (1971)