QCAA Study of Religion study materials
QCAA Study of Religion study resources

QCAA Study of Religion: Religion, Ethics and Contemporary Issues: Reasoning Well

QCAA Study of Religion · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Religion, Ethics and Contemporary Issues: Reasoning Well

What you must understand

Candidates must connect ethical theory to applied issues. Know deontological (duty, rule), teleological/consequentialist (outcome), virtue (character), natural law, divine command, situation ethics, and liberation and feminist ethics. Learn how traditions reason from scripture, natural law, tradition, conscience, reason and experience - and how they weigh these differently. Core applied debates: bioethics (abortion, euthanasia, genetic technology), sexual and gender ethics, war and pacifism (just war criteria), capital punishment, environmental ethics (stewardship versus dominion), economic justice, refugees, and digital and AI ethics. Understand moral absolutism, relativism, objectivism, and the distinction between a tradition's official teaching and the diversity of lay conscience.

Traps in questions

  • Claiming a tradition has one position. Distinguish official magisterial or scholarly teaching from internal debate and lived practice.
  • Confusing the is/ought gap - a description of practice does not justify it as normative.
  • Using a single quotation as a tradition's whole stance; note interpretive weighting and context.
  • Evaluating without criteria. If asked to assess, state the standard (human dignity, autonomy, common good, sanctity of life).

Rule of thumb

Structure every ethics response as PASD: Principle (the ethical norm or theory), Application (how it bears on the specific issue), Source (which authority or reasoning generates it), Dissent (internal disagreement and critique). The fourth step is where top responses differentiate themselves.

Worked example

Question: "Evaluate a religious response to euthanasia." Strong answer: state the operative principle (sanctity of life, or autonomy and compassion), apply it to voluntary euthanasia, ground it in a source (natural law reasoning about human dignity, or scriptural compassion), then present internal dissent (those emphasising palliative care and mercy) and assess which reasoning is more coherent.