Can religious experiences such as mystical and conversion experiences count as evidence for the existence of God, or are they better explained psychologically and physiologically?
Component 01 The nature and impact of religious experience: mystical experience (William James), conversion and corporate experience, the value of experience, and challenges from physiology, psychology (Freud) and the diversity of experiences.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to religious experience. Covers William James's four marks of mystical experience and his pragmatic approach, conversion and corporate experiences, Swinburne's principles of credulity and testimony, and challenges from physiology, Freud and the diversity of experiences, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Reviewed by: AI editorial process; not yet individually human-reviewed
Have a quick question? Jump to the Q&A page
Jump to a section
What this dot point is asking
OCR Component 01 asks about the nature and impact of religious experience: what such experiences are like, and whether they count as evidence for God. You study William James's account of mysticism and his pragmatic test of "fruits", the categories of conversion and corporate experience, Swinburne's principles that make experience evidence, and the challenges from physiology, Freud's psychology and the diversity of experiences across religions. The exam rewards explaining the types precisely and then evaluating whether they support belief in God.
The answer
William James and mystical experience
Conversion and corporate experiences
Swinburne: experience as evidence
Challenges to religious experience
A standard reply is the "nothing but" fallacy: showing that an experience has a brain correlate does not show it is nothing but brain activity, any more than seeing a tree being a brain state shows there is no tree.
Examples in context
Try this
Q1. "Religious experience is no more than a product of the human mind." Discuss. [40 marks]
- What the marker wants. An AO2 essay weighing Freud's wish-fulfilment and physiological accounts against the "nothing but" reply and James's fruits, judging whether naturalistic explanations are complete. AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15.
Q2. Assess Swinburne's principle of credulity as a basis for belief in God. [40 marks]
- Cue. Credulity says things are probably as they seem unless defeated. Weigh its everyday plausibility against the special reasons to doubt religious experiences (conflict, known illusions) and judge.
Exam-style practice questions
Practice questions written in the style of OCR exam questions on this dot point, with worked answer explainers. The year tag is the paper they imitate, not the source.
OCR H573/01 2018 (style)20 marksAssess the view that religious experience provides a convincing argument for the existence of God. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)Show worked answer →
A 40-mark Component 01 essay on the six-level scheme (AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15). Describing types of experience earns AO1; the higher levels reward judging whether experience is evidence.
Explain (AO1). William James studies mystical experience as ineffable, noetic, transient and passive, and judges religious experiences pragmatically by their "fruits". Swinburne's principles of credulity (things are probably as they seem) and testimony (we should trust others' reports) make experiences prima facie evidence for God.
Evaluate (AO2). Challenges: physiological explanations (brain activity, temporal-lobe stimulation); Freud's view that religion is wish-fulfilment and the experience a projection; the diversity and conflict of experiences across religions undermines any single God. Defenders reply that a cause does not show an experience false, and "fruits" remain real.
Judge. A top answer decides whether experience is good evidence, weak evidence, or none, and supports the verdict. A defended conclusion lifts the response to the top level.
OCR H573/01 2021 (style)20 marksCritically assess the claim that all religious experiences can be explained without reference to God. (The full OCR tariff for this essay is 40 marks; the worked answer below is scaled to a 20-mark exemplar.)Show worked answer →
A levels-of-response essay testing AO1 understanding of the naturalistic explanations and AO2 evaluation of how complete they are.
Explain. Physiological accounts link experiences to brain states and drugs; Freud explains them as the mind's wish-fulfilment and projection of a father figure; the conflicting content of experiences across faiths suggests culture, not God, shapes them.
Evaluate. These explanations are powerful for some cases, but a physical correlate does not prove the experience is not also of God (a "nothing but" fallacy), and the transformative fruits James highlights are hard to reduce to neurosis. Yet the diversity objection genuinely weakens the inference to a specific God.
Judge. A high-level answer weighs whether naturalistic accounts are complete or leave a remainder, and reaches a justified conclusion.
Related dot points
- Component 01 The problem of evil: the logical and evidential problems (Mackie, Rowe), the Augustinian theodicy (privation, the Fall, free will) and the Irenaean (Hick's soul-making) theodicy, with their strengths and weaknesses.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to the problem of evil. Covers the logical problem (Mackie's inconsistent triad), the evidential problem (Rowe), the Augustinian theodicy (privation of good, the Fall, free will) and the Irenaean soul-making theodicy (Hick), with the strengths, weaknesses and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 01 Arguments from observation: the teleological (design) argument of Aquinas (the Fifth Way) and Paley (the watch analogy), together with Hume's criticisms and the challenge of Darwinian evolution.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to the teleological (design) argument. Covers Aquinas's Fifth Way (design qua regularity), Paley's watch analogy (design qua purpose), Hume's criticisms of the analogy and the inference to one perfect designer, and the Darwinian challenge, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 01 The nature of God: the attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence and eternity, the dilemma of foreknowledge and free will, and the contrast between God as timeless (Boethius, Aquinas) and everlasting (Swinburne).
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to the nature of God. Covers omnipotence, omniscience, omnibenevolence and eternity, the coherence problems each raises, the dilemma of foreknowledge and free will, and the contrast between a timeless God (Boethius, Aquinas) and an everlasting God (Swinburne), with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 01 Soul, mind and body: Plato's dualism and the immortal soul, Aristotle's soul as the form of the body, Descartes's substance dualism, and the materialist challenge (including Dawkins), with implications for life after death.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 01 guide to the soul, mind and body. Covers Plato's dualism and immortal soul, Aristotle's soul as the form of the body, Descartes's substance dualism and the interaction problem, and the materialist challenge from Dawkins, with the implications for life after death the exam asks you to evaluate.
- Component 03 The challenge of secularism: secularism and secularisation, Dawkins's New Atheism, Freud's psychological critique of religion, the spiritual but not religious movement, and Christianity in public life.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 03 guide to the challenge of secularism. Covers secularism and secularisation, Dawkins's New Atheism, Freud's view of religion as illusion and wish-fulfilment, the spiritual but not religious movement, and debates about Christianity in public life, with the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Sources & how we know this
- OCR A Level Religious Studies (H573) specification — OCR (2016)
- William James, The Varieties of Religious Experience — Project Gutenberg (1902)