Welcome to 'Other Aspects of Human Experience' (OAHE)
Don't worry if this topic feels a bit different from the rest of your Philosophy of Religion course! Other Aspects of Human Experience (OAHE) is not a separate, dusty chapter of abstract theories. Instead, it is your bridge between classical philosophical ideas (such as arguments for God, evil, miracles, and religious experiences) and real-world human life—both historical and contemporary.
Mastering this topic is your absolute secret weapon for the CCEA AS Level Religious Studies examination. Let's break down exactly what it is, why it matters for your grade, and how to apply it across all core AS 8 themes.
1. The Golden Rule of the CCEA Exam Paper
In the CCEA Unit AS 8 examination (An Introduction to the Philosophy of Religion, Paper code: SRE81), understanding where and when to use OAHE is critical.
How the Exam is Structured:
• Exam Duration: 1 hour 20 minutes.
• Section A: Two questions available; you answer one. This section tests pure unit content (AO1 Knowledge and AO2 Evaluation). Do NOT include OAHE here! CCEA examiners report that candidates waste precious time giving modern examples in Section A where no marks are awarded for it.
• Section B: Two questions available; you answer one. This section contains an AO1 explanation question followed by an AO2 evaluative essay that explicitly demands Other Aspects of Human Experience.
The Threshold Band Rule:
In the official CCEA Mark Scheme for Section B AO2, engaging meaningfully with Other Aspects of Human Experience is the threshold requirement to access Bands 3, 4, and 5 (the top marks). If you write a brilliant philosophical essay in Section B but forget to connect it to historical or contemporary human experience, your mark is capped at Band 2!
Key Takeaway: Save your real-world case studies, historical events, and modern debates exclusively for Section B to unlock top-band marks.
2. The Problem of Evil and Human Suffering
When studying the classical theodicies—such as St. Augustine's view of evil as a privation of good (privatio boni) resulting from the Fall, or John Hick's Irenaean "soul-making" theodicy where suffering develops moral character—you must evaluate how these theories hold up against genuine human agony.
A. Moral Evil in Human Experience
Moral evil refers to suffering caused by deliberate human cruelty and misuse of free will.
• The Holocaust (Shoah): The extermination of six million Jews by the Nazi regime presents an immense challenge to classical theodicies. Writers like Elie Wiesel (in his memoir Night) questioned how an omnipotent, loving God could remain silent. The sheer scale of industrialised murder makes Augustine’s idea of aesthetic balance or Hick’s "soul-making" seem inadequate or offensive to many.
• Post-Holocaust Theology: Theologian Jürgen Moltmann (in The Crucified God) argued that God does not watch suffering from an unaffected distance; rather, God enters into human suffering and suffers alongside humanity on the Cross.
• Modern Genocides & Tyranny: Events in Rwanda and Srebrenica, as well as global terrorism, demonstrate that human free will (as defended by Alvin Plantinga and Richard Swinburne) carries catastrophic real-world costs.
B. Natural Evil in Human Experience
Natural evil refers to suffering caused by the natural world, completely independent of human choice.
• Natural Disasters: The 2004 Indian Ocean Tsunami, catastrophic earthquakes, and pandemic diseases pose the question: Why would an all-powerful Creator design tectonic plates or lethal viruses that destroy innocent lives?
• Childhood Illness: Innocent suffering (such as child leukemia) strongly challenges the idea that suffering is solely for moral growth or punishment for original sin.
• Human Solidarity and Pastoral Response: While natural disasters challenge faith, real-world experience shows they also inspire profound communal compassion, sacrificial aid, and pastoral solidarity, which theistic thinkers cite as evidence of moral goodness emerging from tragedy.
Examiner Warning: Do not simply tell the story of a disaster or genocide. You must evaluate it: Does the 2004 Tsunami disprove Hick's soul-making theodicy, or does it support the idea that the world must have regular natural laws (epistemic distance) to be a genuine environment for human growth?
Key Takeaway: Real-world suffering like the Holocaust and natural disasters tests the theoretical claims of Augustine, Hick, Plantinga, and Moltmann against lived human reality.
3. Arguments for the Existence of God in the Modern World
Classical arguments include Thomas Aquinas's Five Ways (Cosmological and Design), William Lane Craig's Kalam argument, William Paley's watchmaker analogy, F.R. Tennant's anthropic and aesthetic principles, and the Ontological arguments of St. Anselm and René Descartes.
A. The Scientific Worldview vs. Theistic Proofs
• Neo-Darwinian Evolution: Modern thinkers like Richard Dawkins argue that natural selection fully explains the appearance of design without any need for Paley’s divine Watchmaker.
• Cosmology & Physics: Theoretical physicists like Stephen Hawking argued that the Big Bang arose naturally from the laws of physics (e.g., quantum gravity), challenging Aquinas’s and Craig’s claim that God is the necessary First Cause.
B. Rational Arguments vs. Lived Faith in a Secular Age
• Secularisation: In contemporary Western society, purely intellectual proofs rarely convince modern secular individuals to adopt religious belief.
• Existential Conviction: For most religious believers in daily human experience, faith is not based on deductive or inductive logic (like Anselm’s definition of God or Aquinas's Prime Mover), but on personal relationship, existential trust, and lived communal worship.
Key Takeaway: In modern human experience, scientific models challenge classical proofs, and lived religious commitment relies far more on existential faith than on rational philosophical arguments.
4. Religious Experience in Everyday Life
Religious experiences range from Rudolf Otto’s concept of the numinous (the feeling of awe before the mysterium tremendum et fascinans—a mystery that is awe-inspiring yet fascinating) to William James’s famous characteristics of mystical experiences: PINT.
Memory Trick for William James: P-I-N-T
• P - Passivity: The individual feels taken over by a higher power.
• I - Ineffability: The experience is beyond verbal description.
• N - Noetic Quality: The experience provides deep, direct insight into truth.
• T - Transience: The experience lasts a short time but produces lasting life change.
A. Modern Corporate and Individual Encounters
• Charismatic and Corporate Worship: Experiences such as the Toronto Blessing involve group phenomena (e.g., falling in the Spirit, weeping, laughing), demonstrating that religious experience can be communal and emotionally intense.
• Radical Conversion Narratives: The life-changing turnaround of figures like C.S. Lewis (moving from atheism to theism) or gang leader Nicky Cruz (dramatic moral conversion through faith) provides strong empirical evidence in human experience that religious encounters produce real, observable fruit.
• Near-Death Experiences (NDEs): Individuals across cultures report crossing over into peace and light, reinforcing belief in the afterlife.
B. Neurological and Psychological Counter-Challenges
• Neurology: Michael Persinger’s "God Helmet" and studies on temporal lobe epilepsy suggest that spiritual feelings can be artificially triggered by magnetic fields or brain anomalies.
• Swinburne’s Defence: Richard Swinburne argues through the Principle of Credulity (we should trust what seems to be true unless we have good reason not to) and the Principle of Testimony (we should trust what people tell us unless they are known liars) that we ought to accept lived testimonies at face value.
Key Takeaway: While neurology and psychology attempt to reduce religious experiences to brain chemistry, dramatic personal transformations (like Nicky Cruz) and corporate movements show their enduring power in human life.
5. Miracles in Human Experience
Philosophers define miracles in distinct ways: David Hume defined a miracle as a violation of the laws of nature by a particular volition of the Deity; Richard Swinburne saw it as a non-repeatable transgression of natural laws by an intentional agent; while R.F. Holland viewed it as a meaningful coincidence (a contingency miracle, like a train stopping just in time to save a child).
A. Modern Claims and Verification: Lourdes
• At the shrine of Lourdes in France, thousands claim healing, but the Lourdes Medical Bureau applies rigorous, independent scientific criteria before declaring any cure medically inexplicable.
• Believers argue that these stringent empirical investigations prove that divine intervention remains an active reality in modern human experience.
B. The Moral Problem of Miracles: Maurice Wiles
• Theologian Maurice Wiles offered a devastating critique from human experience: if God can perform arbitrary physical miracles to cure a single person’s illness at Lourdes, why did God not intervene to stop the gas chambers of Auschwitz or the 2004 Tsunami?
• Wiles argued that an interventionist God who acts selectively would be a partisan, arbitrary tyrant, and morally unworthy of worship. Wiles proposed instead that God's sole act is the ongoing creation and sustaining of the universe itself.
Key Takeaway: Although modern institutions like Lourdes seek scientific verification for miracles, theologians like Maurice Wiles argue that claims of selective divine intervention create severe moral contradictions in a world filled with catastrophe.
Quick Exam Preparation Checklist for Section B
Before you sit your AS 8 examination, make sure you can answer YES to these four essentials:
• 1. Placement: Am I keeping OAHE strictly inside Section B and out of Section A?
• 2. Balance: Did I explain the core philosopher first (AO1) and then evaluate their theory using historical or contemporary human experience (AO2)?
• 3. Critical Analysis: Am I avoiding mere storytelling by asking: "How does this real-life event challenge, support, or reshape the philosophical argument?"
• 4. Key Scholars & Cases: Can I comfortably quote and apply Moltmann, Wiesel, Dawkins, Swinburne, Wiles, Lourdes, and the Holocaust to Section B essay titles?