John Hick’s religious pluralism holds that major religious traditions are culturally conditioned responses to one ultimate divine reality, which he calls the Real. No tradition possesses a complete or uniquely literal understanding of it.
The Real and Religious Experience
Hick’s argument is influenced by Immanuel Kant’s distinction between the noumenal world, reality as it exists independently, and the phenomenal world, reality as humans experience and interpret it. The Real is noumenal: it exists independently of human concepts but cannot be experienced directly or described literally.
Religions encounter the Real phenomenally. Their different concepts of God, Brahman or ultimate reality arise because religious experience is interpreted through distinct languages, cultures and conceptual frameworks.
| Concept | Meaning in Hick’s pluralism |
|---|---|
| The Real an sich | Ultimate reality “in itself,” beyond direct human knowledge |
| The Real as experienced | The Real understood through a particular religious tradition |
| Religious diversity | Different culturally conditioned responses to the same transcendent reality |
Hick calls this the pluralistic hypothesis. He argues that traditions can be authentic when they produce a moral and spiritual transformation from self-centredness to Reality-centredness. Ethical fruits, such as compassion and unselfishness, therefore provide evidence of genuine religious engagement.
A common misconception is that Hick claims all religions teach exactly the same doctrines. He does not. Their beliefs may conflict, but they can still represent different human responses to the ineffable Real.
Critics argue that Hick’s theory weakens exclusive truth claims, such as the Christian belief that salvation is uniquely available through Christ. Others question whether describing the Real as “ineffable” is consistent with claiming that it exists and causes religious experience.
Exam Technique
In an IB Philosophy response, define the Real, explain Hick’s Kantian distinction, and connect pluralism to religious experience and moral transformation. For evaluation, test whether the theory genuinely respects religious differences or imposes Hick’s own framework upon all traditions.
