AS-Level Philosophy (2175)
Scheme of Work: Philosophy of Religion
One possible approach to the delivery of Philosophy of Religion.
Study weeks Topics for study
1
Introduction
2-3
The concept of God
4-11
Arguments relating to the existence of God
12-13
The problem of evil
14-15
Religious language
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
Introduction
Week Topic and spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
1
Introduction to the
Philosophy of Religion
Anthology
references
Key concepts
Skills
Assessment
development
Clarification of the purpose of this course:
• empiricism
to deploy the key philosophical concepts and
techniques students have learnt in
Epistemology in a new context.
• rationalism
Application of
key
philosophical
concepts and
techniques to
new arguments
Students should be able to reference their
‘philosophical toolkit’ of key concepts and
techniques, built up during the Epistemology
course.
• deduction
• induction
Test on
definitions of
key terms and
concepts
• a priori
• a posteriori
As there is a substantial body of accessible
literature on the philosophy of religion, this
part of the course gives students
opportunities to develop and refine their
independent learning and research skills.
• argument
premise,
conclusion,
inference,
entailment,
assumption
• premise
• assumption
• inference
• entailment
• conclusion
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
The concept of God
Week Topic and spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
Anthology
references
Key concepts
Skills
Assessment
development
2
It is important to clarify that this is about what
philosophers mean when they talk about
God – the key attributes of God. These are,
in themselves, controversial, so students
should know that we have selected some key
ones for consideration.
Aquinas, T Summa
Theologica, Part 1,
Question 25, Article 3
• concept
Activities
focusing on:
• Definition
questions
• understanding
the definitions
of key terms
• Outline
questions
The concept of God:
God as omniscient,
omnipotent, supremely good,
and either timeless (eternal)
or within time (everlasting)
and the meaning(s) of these
divine attributes.
• omniscience
• omnipotence: no limitation (eg Descartes)
vs some limitations (eg Aquinas)
• supreme goodness
• eternal/everlasting
As articulating the meaning of the attributes
and considering what happens when they are
combined tend to run together, the distinction
between weeks 2 and 3 will be fluid.
Kenny, A (1969) ‘Divine
foreknowledge and human
freedom’ in Aquinas: a
Collection of Critical
Essays, 1976, University of
Notre Dame Press
• definition
• attribute
• God
• omniscient
• omnipotent
Kretzmann, N (1966)
‘Omniscience and
immutability’, The Journal
of Philosophy, 63, 409-421
• supremely good
• moving from a
broad
understanding
of a concept
to the detailed
clarification of
concepts
• eternal/everlasting
Mavrodes, GI (1963) ‘Some
puzzles concerning
omnipotence’, The
Philosophical Review 72,
221-223
Plato, Euthyphro
Wade Savage, C (1967)
‘The Paradox of the Stone’,
The Philosophical Review,
76, 74-79
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
The concept of God
Week Topic and spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
3
Key arguments can be introduced here – so
the paradox of the stone and the Euthyphro
dilemma. Teachers may wish students to
engage directly with the texts, or provide
edited versions.
Issues with claiming that God
has these attributes, either
singly or in combination,
including:
• The paradox of the stone
• The Euthyphro dilemma
The compatibility, or
otherwise, of the existence of
an omniscient God and free
human beings
The focus for the teaching should be on
analysis of the arguments and students can
be encouraged to present the arguments in
their logical form, rather than in extended
writing.
Anthology
references
Key concepts
Skills
Assessment
development
• argument premise,
conclusion,
inference,
entailment,
assumption
Activities
focusing on:
• understanding
the nature and
structure of
arguments
• paradox
• dilemma
• fallacy
• reductio ad
absurdum
• the drawing of
and
supporting of
appropriate
conclusions
• Outline
questions
• Essay
questions
• Possibly
giving different
groups an
attribute or
combination of
attributes and
asking them to
generate an
essay for the
whole class to
use
• necessary truth
• contingent
statement
• factual impossibility
• logical impossibility
• self-contradiction
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
Arguments relating to the existence of God
Week Topic and spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
4
Teachers could begin by asking students to
draw on their work in Epistemology and
consider how to prove that something exists.
What strategies for doing this would be open
to an empiricist and a rationalist?
• rationalist
What kinds of arguments could be used and
what are the strengths and limitations of
each?
• deduction
What additional issues might proving the
existence of God bring in?
• a posteriori
Introduction to arguments
for the existence of God
Anthology
references
Key concepts
Skills
Assessment
development
• empiricist
• induction
• a priori
Teachers should reinforce the notion that, in
philosophy, if asked about the existence of
God, students can legitimately argue that God
does not exist, that God does exist or that we
cannot know whether or not God exists. What
is important is the quality of the argument.
For this reason, a student might choose to
argue in a way which is directly contrary to his
or her own beliefs, because that way is
philosophically more interesting.
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
Arguments relating to the existence of God
Week Topic and spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
Anthology
references
Key concepts
Skills
Assessment
development
5
Students should understand Paley’s argument
– focusing on a particular understanding of
purpose – parts working together for an end.
They should understand that Paley himself
recognised and responded to some issues
with it. It is important that students understand
the logical form of the argument(s).
Paley, W (1802/2008).
Natural Theology,
Chapters 1, 2 and 5
• teleology
• Detailed
textual
analysis
Swinburne, RG (1968)
‘The Argument from
Design’, Philosophy, 43
(165), 199-212
• regularity
The argument from
design:
arguments from purpose
and regularity, including
those formulated by:
• Paley
• Swinburne
They should understand Swinburne’s
argument – from regularity – and how it is
similar to and different from Paley’s argument.
As the arguments are relatively
straightforward, students could be
encouraged to read independently here,
focusing on commentary on Paley/Swinburne
and/or on the ways in which other
philosophers have engaged with the design
argument. There might be opportunities for
cross-curricular work with colleagues from
science departments.
• purpose
• temporal order
• induction
Hume, D (1779),
Dialogues Concerning
Natural Religion, Parts II,
V, VIII and IX
Outline questions
• Independent
research and
reading skills
Activities
focusing on:
• inference
• explanation
• hypothesis
• the drawing of
and
supporting of
appropriate
conclusions
• Ockham’s razor
• scientific law
• the generation
of examples to
demonstrate
understanding
.
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
Arguments relating to the existence of God
Week Topic and spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
6
Students could consider the extent to which
particular objections had been anticipated by
Paley and how convincing his response to
them might be.
Issues, including those
raised by:
• Paley (himself)
• Hume
• Kant
For Hume, the emphasis should be on the
empiricist basis of his objections.
Hume
1. Proportional effect to cause
2. Uniqueness of the universe
3. Infinite regression
4. Multiple deities
5. Comparison to machine
6. Chance
7. Signs of disorder
Anthology
references
Key concepts
Skills
Assessment
development
• cause/effect
Activities
focusing on:
• infinite
regression
• understanding
the nature and
structure of
the argument
• the drawing of
and
supporting of
appropriate
conclusions
Peer assessment
of short essays
applying a single
objection to the
design argument
in detail. Revising
and improving the
work in the light of
feedback.
Kant
Is the designer God? (no specific text for Kant
here)
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
Arguments relating to the existence of God
Week Topic and spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
Anthology
references
Key
concepts
Skills development
Assessment
7 and
8
The cosmological
argument: causal and
contingency arguments,
including those formulated
by:
It might be helpful to begin with
Kalam, as the general form of the
argument – from the fact of the
universe to God as
cause/explanation.
Aquinas, Summa
Theologica, Part 1,
Question 2, Article 3
• cause
Activities focusing on:
• Outline questions
• Essay questions
• induction and
deduction
• understanding the nature
and structure of
arguments
• Aquinas’ Five Ways (first
three)
• Descartes
• the Kalam argument
Hume’s objections – could use
Copleston and Anscombe
(Davies, An Introduction to the
Philosophy of Religion chapter 5 see Additional resources list page
3) to evaluate Hume.
Issues, including those
raised by:
• Hume
• Russell
Russell’s objections.
Then move to the detailed
analysis of Aquinas’ versions:
(see:
http://www.aquinasonline.com/To
pics/5ways.html for resources)
Descartes, R (1641)
Meditations on First
Philosophy 3
Hume, D (1748)
An Enquiry Concerning
Human Understanding,
Section 11
• the drawing of and
supporting of appropriate
conclusions
The Kalam version is set
out clearly in the
Stanford Encyclopaedia:
http://plato.stanford.edu/
entries/cosmologicalargument/#5
• First: movement/change
• Second: cause/effect
• Third: necessary being
Descartes’ Trademark argument
provides an opportunity to
consider in detail how a rationalist
version of a cosmological
argument might be formulated.
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
Arguments relating to the existence of God
Week Topic and
spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
Anthology references
Key
concepts
Skills development Assessment
9-11
The ontological argument is complex and
challenging and so three weeks have been given,
to encourage students to develop an
understanding of how the argument has been
formulated, objections raised and then
reformulated to respond to those objections.
Davies, An Introduction to the Philosophy of
Religion chapter 4 (see the Additional resources
list, page 3) is useful here, as it offers detail on
each of the arguments, alongside an overview of
the debate.
Anselm, Proslogium,
Chapters II – IV
• definition
• property
Considering precisely
how arguments have
been refined in the light
of objections and
criticisms.
Gaunilo, from the appendix
to St Anselm’s Proslogium
(‘In Behalf of the Fool’)
• a priori
Activities focusing on:
• accidental
Hume, D (1779), Dialogues
Concerning Natural Religion,
Part IX
• necessary
• discussing the relative
merits of different
objections to a
position.
Kant, I (1781), Critique of
Pure Reason, Second
Division (Transcendental
Dialectic), Book II, Chapter 3,
Section IV Of the
impossibility of an ontological
proof of the existence of God
• perfection
The
ontological
argument
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Anselm
Descartes
Leibniz
Malcolm
Plantinga
Gaunilo
Hume
Kant
The texts themselves are challenging, which
provides a useful opportunity for students to
develop their skills in the use of secondary
literature.
Anselm is a sensible place to start and then
Gaunilo’s objections, making Gaunilo’s strategy
clear. Students should consider how far each of
Gaunilo’s objections really does impact on
Anselm’s argument – so distinguishing between
crucial and less crucial arguments – so evaluating
the extent to which Anselm’s version can (or
cannot) survive Gaunilo’s attack.
A similar approach can be taken to Descartes,
Leibniz and Plantinga’s versions – with appeal to
Hume and Kant.
• analysis
Descartes, R (1641)
Meditations 5
• Definition questions
• Outline questions
• Essay questions
• contingent
Malcolm, N (1960) ‘Anselm’s
ontological arguments’, The
Philosophical Review, 69,
41-62
Plantinga, A (1975) God,
Freedom and Evil: Essays in
Philosophy, George Allen &
Unwin, 85-112.
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
The problem of evil
Week Topic and
spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
Anthology
references
Key
concepts
Skills development
Assessment
12-13
This topic provides an opportunity to revisit and
build on some of the issues raised in the
consideration of the concept of God.
Hick, J (1966/1978) Evil
and the God of Love,
New York, Harper and
Row (revised edition)
Chapters 13-17 are
relevant, with the core
argument in Chapter 13
• omnipotence
Independent research and
learning.
Debate on God
and evil.
The problem
of evil: how to
reconcile
God’s
omnipotence,
omniscience
and supreme
goodness with
the existence
of
physical/moral
evil
As always, students should develop a detailed
understanding of the issue, so understand, for
example, that distinctions have been made between
different kinds of evil –physical and moral – so
different approaches might be needed for each.
Students should also understand that the problem
of evil can be considered in both incompatibility
formulations (showing that God logically cannot
exist) or evidential formulations (showing that it is
very unlikely that God exists).
Students should be able to explain precisely how
the strategies for addressing the problem work.
Mackie, JL (1955) ‘Evil
and Omnipotence’, Mind,
64 (254), 200-212
Plantinga, A (1975) God,
Freedom and Evil: Essays
in Philosophy, George
Allen & Unwin, 7-64
• omniscience
• supreme
goodness
Application of
philosophical reasoning to
“real world” problems.
• physical evil
Activities focusing on:
• moral evil
• understanding the
definitions of key terms
and distinctions
• consistent/
inconsistent
• free will
• determinism
• libertarianism
The Plantinga text is challenging and so it is likely
that teachers will need to interpret it for students.
The Hick text is more accessible, so lends itself to
student use.
• (free) agent
• the generation of
examples to
demonstrate
understanding
• discussing the relative
merits of different
objections to a position
Again, as the Problem of Evil is a reasonably
accessible issue, students should be encouraged to
read independently beyond the specification.
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
Religious language
Week Topic and
spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
Anthology
references
Key concepts
Skills development
Assessment
14
Logical positivism:
verification
principle and
verification/
falsification (Ayer)
Empiricist principle of meaning for a propositional
claim (statement).
Ayer, AJ
(1973/1991) The
Central Questions
of Philosophy,
London, Penguin,
22-29
• logical positivism
Activities focusing on:
Outline
questions
• verification
• discussing the
implications of particular
philosophical positions
Cognitivist and
non-cognitivist
accounts of
religious language
and issues arising
from them.
Students can be encouraged to think strategically
about how to engage with the verification principle
either attack it specifically or propose an alternative
that circumvents the issue
Two versions: verifiable empirically in practice or in
principle.
eg is the principle self-refuting? Does it go too far
and make too many statements meaningless?
Ayer, AJ (1946)
Language, Truth
and Logic, 2nd ed,
New York: Dover
(esp. Chapters 1
and 6)
• falsification
• propositional
claim
• understanding the
definitions of key terms
and distinctions
• cognitivist
• non-cognitivist
• assertion
• eschatological
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.
Religious language
Week Topic and
spec
reference
Teaching points/notes
Anthology
references
15
Religious statements as fact-asserting and issues
arising – Flew on Wisdom’s Gods.
Flew, A, RM Hare
and Basil Mitchell
(1955) ‘Theology
and Falsification’ in
New Essays in
Philosophical
Theology, edited by
Antony Flew and
Alasdair MacIntyre.
London, SMC
Press Ltd, 96-105
The university
debate:
• Flew (on
Wisdom’s
Gods)
• Hare (bliks)
• Mitchell (the
Partisan)
Religious
statements as
verifiable
eschatologically
(Hick)
Mitchell – the Partisan – the theist will allow counter
evidence, but not decisively.
Hick – religious statements can be verified
eschatologically.
Hare – religious utterances do not make assertions
– they express bliks.
Key concepts
Skills development
Assessment
Activities focusing on:
• Outline
questions
• the generation of
examples to demonstrate
understanding
• Essay
questions
• discussing the relative
merits of different
solutions to an issue
Hick, J (1960)
‘Theology and
verification’,
Theology Today 17
AQA Education (AQA) is a registered charity (number 1073334) and a company limited by guarantee registered in England and Wales (number 3644723). Our registered address is AQA, Devas Street, Manchester M15
6EX. Copyright © 2014 AQA and its Licensors. All rights reserved. Version 1.1.