If our actions are determined by prior causes or by God, can we be free and morally responsible, and is praise, blame and punishment ever justified?
Component 02 Free will and moral responsibility: hard determinism, libertarianism and compatibilism (soft determinism), the influence of religious ideas of predestination, and the implications for moral responsibility, praise, blame and punishment.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to free will and moral responsibility. Covers hard determinism, libertarianism and compatibilism (soft determinism), the influence of religious predestination, and the consequences for moral responsibility, praise, blame and punishment, 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 02 examines free will and moral responsibility: whether human choices are free or determined, and what follows for praise, blame, reward and punishment. The debate runs between hard determinism (no free will), libertarianism (genuine free will) and compatibilism or soft determinism (both). It also connects to religious ideas of predestination (does God's foreknowledge or election determine us?) and back to Component 01 on God's omniscience. The exam rewards explaining each position precisely and then evaluating whether moral responsibility can survive determinism.
The answer
Hard determinism
Libertarianism
Compatibilism (soft determinism)
Religious predestination and the implications
Examples in context
Try this
Q1. "If determinism is true, no one can be praised or blamed for their actions." Discuss. [40 marks]
- What the marker wants. An AO2 essay weighing hard determinism against compatibilism and libertarianism, judging whether moral responsibility, praise and blame can survive if our choices are caused. AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15.
Q2. Assess whether belief in predestination is compatible with human moral responsibility. [40 marks]
- Cue. Augustine and Calvin's predestination seems to determine salvation, raising the same problem as causal determinism. Weigh whether divine election leaves room for responsibility, perhaps via compatibilism, 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 H573/02 2019 (style)20 marksAssess the view that human beings are not free and so cannot be held morally responsible. (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 02 essay on the six-level scheme (AO1 out of 25, AO2 out of 15). Explaining the positions earns AO1; the higher levels reward judging the responsibility claim.
Explain (AO1). Hard determinism holds every event, including choices, is caused by prior events (physical, psychological, or divine predestination), so free will is an illusion and no one is truly responsible. Libertarianism holds we have genuine free choice not fixed by prior causes. Compatibilism (soft determinism) holds we are determined yet free in the sense that matters: free when acting on our own desires without external constraint.
Evaluate (AO2). Hard determinism fits science but threatens responsibility, praise, blame and punishment. Libertarianism preserves responsibility but struggles to explain uncaused choice. Compatibilism saves responsibility but critics say it redefines freedom too cheaply.
Judge. A top answer decides whether responsibility survives determinism, and defends the verdict.
OCR H573/02 2022 (style)20 marksCritically assess compatibilism as a solution to the free will debate. (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 compatibilism and AO2 evaluation of it.
Explain. Compatibilism (soft determinism) holds that determinism and freedom are compatible: an action is free if it flows from the agent's own desires and is not externally compelled, even though those desires are themselves caused. Responsibility attaches to acts done willingly, so praise and blame remain appropriate.
Evaluate. Strengths: it preserves both science and moral responsibility and matches ordinary talk of acting freely. Weaknesses: critics argue that if my desires are themselves determined I am not ultimately responsible for them, so compatibilist freedom is "freedom" in name only.
Judge. A high-level answer weighs whether acting on caused desires is real freedom, and reaches a justified conclusion.
Related dot points
- Component 02 Conscience: Aquinas's theological account (ratio, synderesis, conscientia) and Freud's psychological account (the super-ego and guilt), with the contrast between conscience as reason and conscience as a construct.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to conscience. Covers Aquinas's account of conscience as reason (ratio, synderesis, conscientia, vincible and invincible ignorance) and Freud's account of conscience as the super-ego producing guilt, with the contrast and the AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Kantian ethics: the good will and duty, the categorical imperative and its three formulations (universal law, ends in themselves, kingdom of ends), and the summum bonum, with strengths and weaknesses.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to Kantian ethics. Covers the good will and acting from duty, the categorical imperative and its three formulations (universal law, ends in themselves, the kingdom of ends), and the summum bonum with the postulates of freedom, immortality and God, plus the strengths, weaknesses and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
- Component 02 Meta-ethics: ethical naturalism, intuitionism (Moore and the naturalistic fallacy) and emotivism (Ayer and Stevenson), and the cognitive and non-cognitive divide.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 02 guide to meta-ethics. Covers ethical naturalism, Moore's intuitionism and the naturalistic fallacy and open-question argument, and the emotivism of Ayer and Stevenson, with the cognitive and non-cognitive divide and 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 03 Augustine on human nature: the state before and after the Fall, original sin and concupiscence, the divided will, the summum bonum, and the necessity of God's grace, with strengths and weaknesses.
An OCR A-Level Religious Studies Component 03 guide to Augustine on human nature. Covers human nature before and after the Fall, original sin and concupiscence, the divided will, the summum bonum, and the necessity of God's grace, with the strengths, weaknesses and AO2 evaluation the exam rewards.
Sources & how we know this
- OCR A Level Religious Studies (H573) specification — OCR (2016)
- Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Free Will — Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (2018)