ETG General Paper
2022 A-Level GP · Paper 1 · Question 2

Religion in the modern world

What this question asks

This question asks whether religion still serves a purpose in a modern, scientific and increasingly secular world, or whether it has been left behind.

Question type: Yes/no question

An ETG General Paper original study guide to the 2022 A-Level GP Paper 1 essay on society & culture. Not affiliated with, or endorsed by, UCLES, Cambridge Assessment or SEAB. A study aid, not an official answer.

Read the question first
Define these terms
  • still: implies religion's role was once secure and is now in doubt, a time word that does real work
  • a role: a function it performs, in meaning, morality, community or politics, not merely whether people believe
  • the modern world: scientific, urban, plural and partly secular, but unevenly so across societies
The hidden assumption

The question assumes modernity and religion pull against each other, smuggling in the secularisation thesis that as societies modernise, religion fades, when the global picture is more religion in some domains and less in others.

The calibration axis

domain: religion's role has shrunk as an explainer of nature and a source of law in many societies, but persists or grows as a source of meaning, identity and community, so the answer differs by function.

Two ways to argue it

How to approach it. Judge whether religion retains a function today, defining 'role' and 'modern world' and resisting both the secularisation story and a flat reassertion of faith.

Option A · Domain: explanation vs meaning

Religion's role as an explanation of the physical world and a basis for public law has genuinely receded in modern, secular societies, but its role as a source of meaning, moral community and identity persists and in places grows, so it has not lost its role but changed which role it plays.

The argument, point by point
  • As an account of how the world works, religion's role has shrunk because science now answers the questions it once monopolised.
    Why When natural phenomena gain testable explanations, the explanatory space religion once filled contracts, so educated moderns increasingly look to science rather than scripture for how, leaving religion the question of why.
    Example The rise of the religiously unaffiliated in developed societies, including Singapore where residents reporting no religion rose from 17% in 2010 to 20% in 2020, tracks this contraction of religion as a default worldview (Singapore Census 2020, as_of 2026-06).
    Then evaluate But losing the explanatory role is not losing all roles: people who accept evolution and cosmology still report needing meaning science does not supply.
  • As a source of meaning and consolation, religion's role persists because modernity has not abolished mortality, grief or the search for purpose.
    Why Secular abundance answers material needs but leaves the existential ones, so religion retains its function precisely where wealth and technology are silent, at death, suffering and the question of what a life is for.
    Example Even in highly secular and prosperous societies, attendance spikes at funerals, disasters and crises, and Singapore remains the world's most religiously diverse nation with faith woven through daily life (Pew Research Center, as_of 2026-06).
    Then evaluate The complication: this role is real but private, so religion can matter intensely to individuals while losing its grip on public institutions.
  • As a basis for community and identity, religion's role is in some places growing, not shrinking, against the secularisation script.
    Why In atomised, mobile societies religious communities supply belonging and mutual aid the market and state do not, so the very conditions of modernity can revive religion's social function.
    Example Religious organisations remain major providers of welfare, schooling and disaster relief worldwide, and in Singapore faith communities are central to the multiracial social fabric the state actively manages (singapore_evidence.md, as_of 2026-06).
    Then evaluate Yet identity-religion cuts both ways: the same belonging that comforts can harden into the sectarian division modern plural societies most fear.
  • As a force in politics and law, religion's role is contested and resurgent, which itself disproves the simple decline story.
    Why Far from fading, religion drives some of the sharpest modern political conflicts, so its public role is being renegotiated rather than retired, in both liberal and illiberal directions.
    Example The overturning of Roe v. Wade in 2022, shaped by religiously grounded movements, shows faith actively shaping law in a wealthy modern democracy (Dobbs, as_of 2026-06).
    Then evaluate This is why 'still have a role' is almost too weak a question: in politics religion is not clinging on but advancing, for better and worse.
Strongest counter & rebuttal

Across Western Europe and increasingly East Asia, belief, attendance and religious authority over public morality have fallen sharply, and the rising share reporting no religion suggests a genuine, generational drift away from faith that no amount of reframing erases. But secularisation is uneven and incomplete even where it is strongest, religion is growing globally in absolute numbers, and the decline of institutional religion in some domains coexists with its persistence in meaning and its resurgence in politics, so the honest reading is redistribution of religion's roles, not their disappearance.

Measured conclusion

Religion still has a role in the modern world, but not the role the question imagines defending: its grip as an explanation of nature and an unquestioned basis for law has loosened in secular societies, while its function as a source of meaning, community and contested political identity endures and in places strengthens, so modernity has not ended religion's role but reshaped which roles it plays.

What makes this Band 1: Reaches the top band by splitting 'role' across explanation, meaning, community and politics rather than answering yes or no, by reading secularisation as uneven and domain-specific, and by using the no-religion data and Dobbs as evidence pulling in opposite directions.
Option B · Premise-rejecting: the secular is not the absence of the religious

The question assumes a clean line between a religious past and a secular modern world, but that line is an illusion: modern societies have not replaced religion so much as relocated its functions into secular forms, so religion's role has not ended, it has gone partly unnamed.

The argument, point by point
  • The needs religion served are permanent, so a society that abandons religion must meet them some other way.
    Why Meaning, ritual, belonging and a moral framework are human requirements rather than historical accidents, so where formal religion recedes, substitutes arise to do the same work, which means the function never actually left.
    Example The rise of secular substitutes, from wellness and self-help movements to political ideologies that supply identity and moral certainty, shows the religious function persisting under new labels (global pattern, as_of 2026-06).
    Then evaluate So the secularisation data measures the decline of religion's institutions, not the decline of the role, which has migrated rather than vanished.
  • Modern politics in particular performs many of the functions religion once held, which is why it feels so charged.
    Why When ideologies offer a total worldview, a community of the righteous and a vision of salvation, they occupy the structural slot religion vacated, so political tribalism inherits religion's fervour and its intolerance.
    Example The quasi-religious intensity of contemporary political movements, including the conviction-driven mobilisation behind events like the 2021 US Capitol riot, displays devotion, heresy and apostasy in secular dress (widely documented, as_of 2026-06).
    Then evaluate The reframe's edge: those who declare religion obsolete often hold their politics with exactly the faith they think they have outgrown.
  • Even secular states quietly preserve religious structure, which shows modernity did not break with religion as cleanly as it claims.
    Why National rituals, founding myths, sacred documents and civic festivals reproduce the binding functions of religion, so the modern state runs partly on a civil religion it rarely admits to.
    Example Singapore's careful state management of religious harmony, public commemorations and the language of shared values treats the social functions of religion as too important to leave to chance (singapore_evidence.md, as_of 2026-06).
    Then evaluate This complicates the question fatally: a society can call itself secular while depending on the very functions it attributes to a superseded religious past.
  • Because the functions persist, the real question is not whether religion has a role but which version of that role we want.
    Why If meaning and belonging will be supplied either by religion or by its substitutes, the choice is between forms, so debating religion's existence misses the live issue of whether religious or secular versions serve a plural society better.
    Example The contrast between societies that channel the meaning-function through plural, state-mediated religion, like Singapore, and those where it flows into polarised secular ideologies illustrates the real trade-off (Pew Research Center, as_of 2026-06).
    Then evaluate The honest conclusion: religion's role is not in doubt, only its packaging, and pretending modernity has dissolved the role blinds us to the substitutes already filling it.
Strongest counter & rebuttal

If political loyalty, wellness culture and national ritual all count as religion, then the term explains nothing, and the genuine, measurable decline of belief in God and the authority of religious institutions deserves to be taken at face value rather than reinterpreted away. But the point is not that these substitutes are religions, it is that they occupy the same functional slot, so the decline of belief is real while the role religion played is not vacant, which is exactly what the question, framed as a simple yes or no about religion's survival, is built to obscure.

Measured conclusion

Religion still has a role in the modern world because the modern world never abolished the needs religion met, only some of the institutions that met them: meaning, belonging and moral framing have been relocated into secular substitutes, often political ones, so the honest answer is not whether religion has a role but which form of that enduring role a plural society should prefer.

What makes this Band 1: Earns the top band by rejecting the religious-versus-secular dichotomy the question assumes, showing the role persisting under secular labels, and conceding the empties-the-word objection without abandoning the functional argument.
How the two approaches differ

Option A accepts the secularisation frame and splits 'role' by domain, finding religion diminished as explanation and law but persistent as meaning and identity. Option B rejects the frame, arguing modernity relocated religion's functions into secular substitutes rather than ending them. Both are defensible: A is the calibrated domain answer a marker expects; B is the premise-rejecting move that reads as more conceptual if the functional-substitute claim is held without overreaching.

Common pitfalls
FAQ
How do I avoid a one-sided answer on whether religion still has a role?
Split 'role' by function. Religion's role as an explanation of nature and a basis for law has shrunk in secular societies, but its role in meaning, community and politics persists or grows. Use the rising no-religion data on one side and religion's political resurgence, such as Dobbs, on the other, and the balance is built in.
What is the best Singapore angle for the religion question?
Singapore as the world's most religiously diverse nation, per Pew, with state-managed religious harmony. It shows religion remaining socially central while the share reporting no religion rises, so faith persists as community and identity even as institutional belief softens. It anchors both the persistence and the change in one society.
Can I argue the question sets up a false split between religious and secular?
Yes, and it is a strong reframe. The argument is that modernity relocated religion's functions, meaning, belonging, moral certainty, into secular substitutes like political ideology, so the role persists under new labels. Concede that calling everything religion empties the word, then keep the point functional rather than literal.
ETG General Paper

Want your essays marked like this?

These outlines are free to read. Book a trial lesson to have your own GP essays marked against the band descriptors, the way ETG teaches General Paper from the exam backwards.

Book a Trial Class   WhatsApp the team