Ace the 2025 GCSE Philosophy and Ethics Exam – Get Prepped and Philosophize with Confidence!

The laws of nature argument posits that the consistent and observable laws of nature suggest that the universe operates in a predictable manner. This perspective can create a contradiction with the validity of religious experiences, as these experiences may appear to be subjective and not universally verifiable through empirical observation.

The correct choice points to the idea that religious experiences are not always aligned with logical consistency. This lack of universally recognized consistency can lead to skepticism regarding the validity of these experiences. If a religious experience contradicts established natural laws or cannot be replicated under controlled conditions, it raises questions about its reliability and authenticity.

In contrast, observing consistent natural laws offers a compelling basis for understanding reality, often perceived as more reliable than individual or anecdotal religious experiences. The nature of these experiences can vary significantly from person to person, which often leads to a lack of agreement about their significance, further complicating their validation within a framework grounded in empirical evidence. Thus, the argument suggests that the variability and subjective nature of religious experiences may undermine their standing when juxtaposed with the consistent laws of nature.