Philosophy · Year 12

Active learning ideas

The Concept and Attributes of God

This topic invites students to become logical detectives, examining some of the biggest concepts in Western thought for cracks and contradictions.

• National Curriculum Attainment Targets
• AQA A-Level Philosophy: Section 4.1 - Metaphysics of God - The concept and nature of God

• 30–50 min
• Pairs → Whole Class
• 3 activities

Activity 01

• Socratic Seminar
• 45 min · Small Groups

Paradox Stations

Set up different 'stations' around the classroom, each with a different philosophical puzzle (e.g., The Paradox of the Stone, The Euthyphro Dilemma, The Free Will vs. Omniscience problem). In small groups, students rotate through the stations, spending time at each to formulate the paradox in their own words and brainstorm a possible solution.

Analyse the concept of an omnipotent being and the paradox of the stone.

Facilitation Tip

Provide prompt cards at each station with key quotes from philosophers to guide their thinking.

What to look for

Students write a one-paragraph explanation of the paradox of the stone on a mini-whiteboard, which the teacher can quickly scan to check for understanding.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Social Awareness
• Relationship Skills

Activity 02

• Formal Debate
• 50 min · Whole Class

Formal Debate: Divine Attributes on Trial

Assign students roles to argue for or against the logical compatibility of the three 'omni' attributes. One team argues they are coherent, the other argues they are contradictory, and a third group acts as the jury to evaluate the arguments presented.

Explain the conflict between divine omniscience and human free will.

Facilitation Tip

Encourage students to focus on the logical structure of their arguments rather than personal belief.

What to look for

An A-Level style essay responding to a prompt such as, 'Assess the claim that a perfectly good being cannot be omnipotent'.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Self-Management
• Decision-Making

Activity 03

• Socratic Seminar
• 30 min · Pairs

Solving for Omnipotence

Present students with various definitions of omnipotence (e.g., Descartes's 'God can do anything, even the logically impossible' vs. Aquinas's 'God can do all things that are logically possible'). In pairs, students must analyse the strengths and weaknesses of each definition and decide which is more philosophically robust.

Evaluate whether the attributes of omnipotence, omniscience, and supreme goodness are logically compatible.

Facilitation Tip

Use mini-whiteboards to have pairs quickly share their final conclusion and a single reason for it.

What to look for

Students use a 'confidence tracker' to rate their ability (from 1 to 5) to define each key term, explain each paradox, and summarise a philosopher's response.

• Analyze
• Evaluate
• Create
• Social Awareness
• Relationship Skills

A few notes on teaching this unit

Begin by securing a firm understanding of the definitions for each attribute before introducing the paradoxes. Use clear analogies to make abstract problems more concrete, for example, comparing God's atemporal knowledge to watching a recording of a football match you already know the outcome of. Always bring the discussion back to the logic of the arguments, encouraging students to critique the analogies and ideas presented.

Students will develop the ability to analyse complex abstract ideas, articulate philosophical paradoxes clearly, and evaluate proposed solutions with logical rigour.

---

Watch Out for These Misconceptions

• Omnipotence means God can do absolutely anything, like creating a square circle.

  The classical philosophical definition of omnipotence, particularly from thinkers like Aquinas, is the ability to do anything that is logically possible. A 'square circle' is a logical contradiction, not a 'thing' that can be made. Therefore, an inability to create one is not seen as a limitation of power, but rather a reflection of the laws of logic.

• If God knows I will choose to do X tomorrow, then I am not free to choose otherwise.

  This assumes God's knowledge causes the event. Philosophers like Boethius propose a solution by arguing God is atemporal (outside of time). From this perspective, God sees the past, present, and future simultaneously, much like a person watching a film sees the beginning and end at once. This knowledge doesn't cause the events in the film, it merely observes them.

• These are purely religious questions with no right or wrong answer.

  While the topic originates in theology, its treatment in philosophy is based on logic and reason. We are assessing the logical coherence of concepts, not the validity of faith. Arguments can be judged as valid or invalid, sound or unsound, based on established philosophical principles.

---

Methods used in this brief

• Socratic Seminar
• Formal Debate