Philosopher Reflects on Death, Atheism, Morality & Meaning | Alex O’Connor
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 12 พ.ค. 2024
- Today we are joined by the Cosmic Skeptic, Alex O'Connor, for a fascinating look into philosophy, atheism, and the pursuit of an ethical life. Alex has gained recognition for his unique perspective on reality, which he interprets through the lenses of materialism and agnosticism. This makes for an intriguing conversation as André and him engage in a deep dive into various topics.
The discussion revolves around their viewpoints on God, religion, consciousness, and morality. They dissect the potential dangers of intellectualizing and its impact on our understanding of the world. Furthermore, they tackle an interesting question: can the study of ethics lead to an individual becoming more ethical in their actions?
Alex also shares his thoughts on near death experiences, artificial intelligence, and facing the fear of death.
André's Book Recommendations: www.knowthyself.one/books
___________
Timecodes:
0:00 Intro
1:36 What it Means to Live a "Good" Life
5:37 Defining Meaning and Purpose
9:34 What Makes Something Bad or Good
14:15 The Balance of Open Mindedness
16:03 Atheism & Theism: Where's the Line?
18:30 Is God Dead? Being an Agnostic vs Atheist
21:10 The Ignorance of Belief
24:35 Distinguishing Between Wisdom & Knowledge
30:35 What is God?
34:41 How Studying Theology Changed Alex's Perspective
39:53 Religon & Tribalism: Why We're Afraid of Opposing Opinions
45:35 What It Looks Like to Live Ethically
49:44 The Danger of Over-Intellectualizing
58:37 Materialism Facing off with Consciousness
1:03:09 Are Near Death Experiences Real?
1:08:38 Why The Fear of Death is Valuable
1:24:09 The Ethics of Artificial Intelligence
1:26:38 Why He's Changed His Mind on Consciousness
1:28:18 Making the Most of Our Lives
1:30:19 Conclusion
___________
Alex J. O’Connor is founder of the “Cosmic Skeptic” TH-cam channel, podcast and blog, platforms dedicated to the publication of philosophical ideas and debates in an accessible format.
A graduate of philosophy and theology from St. John’s College, Oxford University, Alex is an international public speaker and debater, having delivered addresses across multiple continents at conferences, universities, and local drinking groups, as well as debated ethics, religion, and politics with a number of high-profile opponents before college audiences, on radio talk shows and on national television.
Alex’s online videos have been collectively viewed around fifty million times, attracting over 500,000 people to subscribe to his regular content. He has produced videos with notable experts in respected fields, such as Peter Singer, Richard Dawkins, Bishop Robert Barron, and William Lane Craig.
Instagram: / cosmicskeptic
TH-cam: / @cosmicskeptic
Website: cosmicskeptic.com
___________
Looking to Start a Podcast? Podcasting Course: www.podcastpurpose.com/
Know Thyself
Instagram: / knowthyself
Website: www.knowthyself.one
Clips Channel: / @knowthyselfpodcast
Listen to all episodes on Audio:
Spotify: open.spotify.com/show/4FSiemt...
Apple: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
André Duqum
Instagram: / andreduqum
Meraki Media
merakimedia.com
/ merakimedia
I'm so glad Alex O'Connor is finally being referred to as a Philosopher. Let's not kid ourselves, that's exactly what he is.
Correct. And he is not a physicist.
He is an idiot.
@@BobSmith-lb9nc ?😂
hahahaahah@@BobSmith-lb9nc
@@BobSmith-lb9nc He is also not a delivery boy or a truck driver. Imagine that...
I love how legitimately deadpan hilarious some of the stuff Alex says is, especially these comically violent thought experiments.
The thought of Alex walking into an operating theatre and crushing the brain of a patient on death’s doorstep. Not an image I was expecting to imagine.
@@NeutralMjolkHotel😂
Comic Skeptic
"I trust that you haven't poisoned me" LOL
What I really love about Alex is the fact that he can spit out soo much wisdom when he speak while still can maintained to speak it out soo eloquently without even a bit of stutter. And he just 24. Wonder how great his mind can be in the next in the next 15- 20 years. Keep going on growing Alex. Our society need great thinker like you. 🎉🎉
I agree with your sentiments. I remember following him on TH-cam several years ago, when he was still in his teens, and even then he was borderline brilliant.
Love this interview streak Alex is on currently. I swear I’ve heard him talk about ethical emotivism, theory of knowledge, and death denialism 1000 times in the past month but it’s always captivating and thought-provoking.
I listen to everything I see from Alex, but the second half of this conversation is one of the wildest journeys he's taken me on
I was about to leave half way through the video because it seemed like a one-sided discussion and the questions weren't pressing enough. However, this comment made me stay for the second half and I'm grateful that I did! Thanks for this comment.
Listen to “Freedom From the Known” audiobook.
I have grown tired of every youtuber. But Alex is a different case; he is really really interesting and pleasing to hear. I admire the way he presents his ideas
Nah he a hippie douche fake..I'm sooo enlightened...lol
That zoom out shot was wild, I did not expect the homie set on the chair yoga style
When Alex is talking about the urgency we should have when it comes to life, I completely agree and I actually am experiencing something like that currently. I'm going to be graduating soon out of high school and I remember when I was in middle school and thought that senior year is so far away and it'll be forever and now I'm about to graduate in 4 months and I'm realizing how much I took for granted. I've become much more grateful of being in the school and I've been using my resources within school much more like talking to my teachers or meeting new students. I have this sense of urgency to get better grades and do as much as I can and experience as much as I can before I leave this school as a student forever. There will never be a time in my life ever again when I'll be able to experience being a high schooler the way I am now.
You're doing well just thinking this way at your age. Most people don't realize this when they're 18. More like 30 they finally get it.
30? People don't get shit their whole lives. I know dozens of 40+ yo people that haven't had a deep thought thier entire lives. I, too, used to think adults understand certain things in life. Adults are just still lost todlers that haven't learned anything
I'm 37. I'm much different now than when I was 27. I have high hopes that Alex will have even more great thoughts as he gets older. Great interview.
He'll be known as Alexander the Great.
I think your hopes will be proved correct in time.
Never expected you'd have him on here, been a fan of both of y'all for years!!
Such an interesting conversation! Only half way through watching and thoroughly enjoying the collision of logic and intuition from both Alex & André. Another safe, wholesomely curious and joyful container held for learning, growth, healing and expansion 🤍Thank you for the myriad of lenses you bless us with the opportunity to see from!
Love the conversation! I’ve been following Alex for so long and I am always really excited for videos like this, thank you! 🖤
Alex is on the top rung of my Great TH-cam Discoveries ladder.
I've listened all of the recent podcasts Alex has been visiting, but I would say this was the most interesting. The consciousness part from around 55m until 1h 10m was fascinating and thought-provoking.
Thank you to both.
Great convo 👍🏻 Ive never known another definition between knowledge and wisdom but that knowledge is acquired through theory and wisdom is acquired through experience.
This is amazingly insightful. I felt wisdom and electricity from the compassion and kindness here. Thanks for the information; Super informative and inspiring.
Lovely heartwarming comment.
Dear Andre, thank you for all the time and effort you put into these interviews. You are changing lives!
May I ask for a request…. Would you consider interviewing Daryl Anka (Bashar), and perhaps going deeper than other interviewers do?.. because I find you are the absolute best at that. Thank you once again, and a big virtual hug from Denmark.
Outstanding work interviewing one of our better exponents of the Internet.
33:10 Thank you, Mr. O'Connor. You really give me some hope.
Great chat. Alex is streets above all other philospohers. He is holds his great interlect with humilty and grace.
I would agree
Thank you for another fascinating talk to process and in which to find wisdom.
I'm glad to hear that Alex is getting away from the limited intellectual approach to reality that seemed to be so dominant and is beginning to appreciate the value and mystery of conscious experience.
Alex, I wish you would make content on the philosophy of consciousness. This is a really interesting topic.
He has a few podcast epidsodes on this topic. At least 2.
Alex is one of the to-be famous philosophers of our time
Yes satan will raise his minions to the top lol.
Most of the time it’s hard for me to take in what Alex talks about- I feel like it’s so over my head. Regardless I could listen to him talk all day.
When I see a video with Alex, I know it’s going to be an interesting conversation.
7:15 maybe it's less about actually creating the meaning intrinsically, but creating the narrative we tell ourselves
24:50 practical and experienced knowledge
Love this. Im DYING to see the podcast episode between Alex and Sam Harris
I would love to see him with either Sam Harris or Bernado Kastrup.
Thank you my HEIRS Alex and Andre for attending...unto our OWN! Love ye both too! The I AM said if ye LOVE ME! ATTEND unto my Sheep our OWN. Gratitude and Honor my Heirs! Likewise share thy shared "i: AM unto all the Who am I?
What drugs are you on?
@michaelleclezio6096 my beloved, the knowledge of God is FOOLISHNESS UNTO THEM WHO ARE PERISHING! Unfamiliar ways of speaking unto many but yet is Clear as water unto Whom BELONGS? Love you beloved without shame but with boldness!
From a non academic standpoint, having read non of the literature on the subject, it seems fairly intuitive to me that our primary drive is one of self preservation (with added pursuit of pleasure whenever possible).
To my mind, morality, tribalism (collaboration to ensure individual survival which leads to the need to protect each other to ensure that continued collaboration) and fear of death (the inescapable end to that preservation) can all be explained as extensions of this concept.
As I mentioned, I'm a non academic so I am quite happy for somebody to explain where I'm going wrong with that basic outlook of the questions posed.
What about people who do the s word?
@@zootsoot2006 which S word?
Unaliving yourself@@LittleMAC78
Refreshing conversation, philo's Sophia meets minds willing to lay it all out neutrally on the table. I see wisdom as the embodiment of the insights/knowledge obtained, without the embodiment, knowledge is just a set of facts that are not 'lived' to their fullness.
Correct. I have zero fear of death and also zero motivation to "do things that outlast me" including having children. When I say I don't fear death that doesn't mean I don't fear agony and the suffering my loved ones would go through, but death itself doesn't scare me anymore.
It's the same for me. The only thing I want is to be receive MAID, but have zero access to it. Not only do I not fear death, but it's the only thing worth pursuing for myself.
I come to realize that wanting to have children is basically out of the fear of death.
looking forward of you both getting more in depth about ethics in animal suffering and rights
Andre is a good interviewer,his level of knowing
The mind of a philosopher never looses its hunger, but maybe it's more like a dog chasing its tail than a problem solving enquiry.. All the love though 💚
Haha good one. Materialist philsophers surely this is true
I think it’s more like- the dog thinks of and tries different ways to catch his tail even though it’s impossible.
It's better than believing that the tail is a device created by aliens and they'll torture the dog if it didn't cath the tail.
Philosophy is the art of dead ends and going around in circles.
.@exaucemayunga22 I love this answer.
Wild ! I used to watch Alex’s channel all the time back in the 2010’s during my atheism arc. Incredibly insightful conversation 😌
Me too! He is one of the best speakers and philosophers in the world in my opinion.
Quick question - You said "during my atheism arc.", are you still an atheist?
16:00 I put on an atheist hat as a christian, and now I'm an atheist. Glad I looked at things critically
I think wisdom is something like the sorts of knowledge that cannot be acquired alone by an individual within a single lifetime. It's the kind of knowledge acquired through many conversations between many people, over many lifetimes.
wrong, acquire by conversation, ffs
Brilliant person thank you from inviting scholar to your channel, Alex brings logic to the table.
Excellent audio!
I’d be interested in Alex’s take on Jung in terms of religion. Whether religion is true literally or not doesn’t negate that people have an innate desire to revere that which we feel greater than ourselves.
Used to be all in on the materialistic brain/mind world view but ever since seeing phillip goff on alex's podcast, the bit about picturing the colour red in your mind but not finding that experience physically in the brain (demonstrated with a triangle in this podcast), I had to instantly re-evaluate how i think about it (plus a few acid ego death experiences also had a bit of an impact haha), these days I'm leaning towards the idea that the concious experience itself has to be some kind of underlying fundamental part of reality
Ill bet u can find the experience of red physically in the brain.
@@slopedarmor i bet he would answer with then show me, that argument purely depends on intuition and ignorance
Great interview!
Great one André!
One thought about the interaction problem - the fact that if you change the brain, you change your experience of consciousness (whether through injury, drugs, electrical stimulation, etc) - one counterargument to this being a counterargument is that the brain could be more like an antenna than a jar. Rather than consciousness being "in" the brain, consciousness could potentially be out there in the entire universe, and our brains are simply antennae that pick up a certain wavelength / frequency. So certainly materialism is real there is the sense that the antennae has to be working to receive the signal, and damage to the antennae or a rewiring of it would mean the signal would be received in a different manner - but it doesn't necessarily mean that the signal itself comes from the brain.
I suspect you would have to move your hearing down as well. I think one of my ex lecturers thought it is likely that the inner ear also helps us locate the feeling of being in the brain as its a major part of the balance system. If I remember correctly the retina is classified as part of the central nervous system.
11:00 watching Alex age and seeing his experiences change his attitudes is something many young people should note. It’s not only that one changes as we age, we change in ways that older people understand the young will go through, which is why older people will often ignore younger people.
Everyone put your mind energy into giving this man the personal experience of the creator he wants. ❤
BIG TIME CHILLS THIS MENTALITY SHOULD BE GIVEN MORE SPACE IN THE MAINSTREAM MEDIA !!!!!
So here's a thought experiment, Alex:
Close your eyes. Breathe in deeply and exhale. That breath, the breath you took before it, and every breath you will ever take is because your ancestors were successfully tribal and carnivorous. But be not embarrassed.
My reality and yours is personal, proximal, and present (temporal). Born into Jim Crow, educated during the Civil Rights struggle and Vietnam, now 75 with my annual wellness appointment looming next week, I can't count the "epiphanies" I've had.
I hope my internist will give me "the 20 more years bad news report" (lol), so that I may have many more breaths and profound revelations.
Keep up the good work; both of you. This was a wonderful interview. I am going to watch it again!
It's insane how the vegan community had Alex O'Connor fighting passionately for their cause, and then just casually dropped him like hot garbage the second he had to take care of his own health... Mind-blowing
It is a little bit complicated no? Like many people actually supported him (most notably unnatural vegan) and as a vegan myself I still watch all his stuff
I'd be interested to hear more conversation of thinkers along the lines of Philippa Foot who used Aristotle's metaphysics to ground "goodness" in the nature of things. Good is what is proper to a thing as the kind of thing that it is.
Alex is a credit to philosophical discours and qualatative thinking, he should be made deputy priminister for either side of politics in the UK.
Would it change him and also politiques ?
I love Alex so much
Particularly, i don't feel the urge to make any long-lasting impact in the world. For me, a good life is one in which i can experience interesting experiences while feeling the least amount of pain. Though some pain can be a very interesting experience. I recognize that once we die, our consciousness no longer exists, but i don't feel the rush to travel the world or make some great contributions to society. I feel like just living a nice life is enough.
Very good. I luv Alex!
Excellent
How can Alex be opposed to the individual approach to solving issues like factory farming? I really wished you asked him about that. Even if he thinks most of the change should come through other means like policy, decreasing the supply and demand through consumer choices is still effective. I think it’s a cognitive dissonant way of justifying his reversion back to eating meat.
Imagine I said the individualist bottom up approach isn’t a good solution to ending child pron, and I continued to purchase it. The stuff ONLY exists BECAUSE of the consumer choices
I listened this in my bed for a bedtime story and founded myself sitting on my my bed with phone in my hand just listening.
Against utilitarianism: “you cannot judge any artefact except by using it as it was intended. It is no good judging a butter-knife by seeing whether it will saw logs.” (C.S. Lewis, ‘Christianity and Culture’).
I believe that that green tea is not poisoned not only because of my background knowledge but also because I tasted it and lived. As in Christianity: a Chistian believes not only because of rational or historical proofs, but also because he tasted Life and now he truly lives.
“We associate the natural side of our nature with the unethical side of our nature so it shouldn't be a problem to recognise that this is an unavoidable part of our biology because without that to fight against ethics wouldn't even be worth doing, there wouldn't be any need for ethics if it didn't somehow subvert we wanted to do anyway. So of course, anything we think is ethically worthwhile is going to have to be achieved in in the face of a strong inclination to do the opposite.” - if ethics is expression of emotion, what is the origin of ‘the unethical side of our nature’? What if my emotional preferences does not enter into contradiction with my ‘unethical side of our nature’? The ground for a system of values cannot be found in any appeal to emotion. “. The Chest-Magnanimity-Sentiment- these are the indispensable liaison officers between cerebral man and visceral man. It may even be said that it is by this middle element that man is man: for by his intellect he is mere spirit and by his appetite mere animal.” (Lewis, The Abolition of Man)
everything ends in night (Boewulf knew it) - your Ego’s desires, the fame and all realisations. Ego must dies so that your true Self (in God) truly live
Surprised! Found Alex in my atheist era, and found this podcast in my new spiritual era. Interested to hear how these ways of looking at life intermingle. Thankful this exists!
There is no future in Spiritualism, focus on ur direction, get good at it, and charge money for ur services.
@@ck58npj72 least weird sounding materialist
What leads you towards spiritualism?
A clever man can get himself out of the situations that a wise man never finds himself within.
Alex I know I’m not entitled to the insight, but I would really really like to hear some more in-depth thoughts on your current stance on veganism. I think it would mean a lot to many. Are you still leaning plant-based when easily achievable? Where do you think the ethical obligation sits now? Love your way of articulation so I’m sure many would be interested.
He wouldn't have an in-depth thought, other than hypocrisy and cognitive dissonance.
this!
@@archangelarielle262he’s a non cognitivist so anything goes…
10:51 if we change the script here and ask what if the person is sacrificing themselves for the 5, the selfless act of taking on suffering to increase the pleasure or reduces suffering is a good thing. If the five force the one against his will this is a selfish act of forcing suffering, so selfless vs selfishness is a determining factor.
I'm glad to see Alex on here. I've been "following" him for many years... from back when I used to debate him in my head as a fairly fundamentalist Christian, to now as I pursue a more fluid and meaningful spiritual path. Alex's mind has been opened considerably over the years, and conversations like this will propel him further. I agree with another commenter on this video...Alex is more spiritually advanced than he probably knows, and strangely closer to God than many religious people.
If God was real, I think he would reward people like him instead of religious people guided by ignorance and wishful thinking.
@@exaucemayunga22 God rewards those who seek him. AKA they have an open mind and a willingness to know absolute Truth. Alex is definitely further along in this direction that many religious folks. And btw...God isn't real...He is reality. It just so happens that reality itself is intelligent and capable of relationship...with itself. But the only way to KNOW that is complete openness, vulnerability, and surrender.
@@larrydunivin240 do you think Alex doesn't fit that category? He's told of the lengths he's gone to to seek god, and... nothing. And yet, we are told all the time stories where god reveals himself to those that aren't even seeking. It even happens in the bible. Strange.
Supposed to be closer to god yet so far away, you should listen to Alex talking about divine hiddenness.
Depends on the god you're talking about. I'm willing to bet that if there is a god, they're a psychopath, in which case, Alex is leagues better than this demiurge that dumped this existence on us. Maybe if Alex celebrated animals eating each other alive in the wild, and endorsed slavery, then he would be very "close to God".
Would love to see you conversate with Anna Brown :)
this is good stuff
Alex o Connor is definitely the smartest person on the internet
I hate fan-boying like that and never have before but I am continually more and more impressed with him. Been listening to him for about 2 years now and have literally consumed every piece of content he’s put out and has been put out with him… and my god man, he operates on a completely different level. He converses with the absolute best of the best minds in their fields and can match them and often times out maneuver them. It’s actually bizarre and amazing to me someone like Alex exists. Makes me embarrassingly jealous that no amount of school or experience would ever bring me to par.
we are all on the internet, but I'm stupid@@user-wn1kq8jx5q
I think the fear of death and the uncertainty of what comes after it is what started religion.
Terror management theory would agree but I recommend you look up Animism, it helps people conceptualize the origins of spirituality.
nonpropositional knowledge seems to me contradictory, very interesting words on this topic
On the issue of "Terror Management Theory." There probably is truth to that, but instead of adopting worldviews that espouse an afterlife to deal with it, I've found that simply coming to terms with it and making the most of the life I have, has worked just fine. I have X amount of time. What am I going to do with it? To borrow something from a movie, "You can get busy living, or get busy dying." I choose the former.
Unto all the shared "i" AM. Who are ye ALL? Thy shared "i" AM who love with patience, mercy, and grace! Judgment and Justice is Thy THRONE! Gratitude and Honor!
Unto the lone Oliver Jamito. Who are ye? Thy wonky comments doeth confound thy audience - in heaven above and the earth below. Savory spices to thee!
@@stephenvankleeck4801 my beloved remembering "YE ONCE BORN"! Beloved obviously comes crawling, to walking, and till now! Look at Thy feet! Why desired all thy feet without 1ST preserve...for Thy feet ye can call rest FILLED and delight. Through thy conversations given just for thee. Utterances will know Utterances. Utterances giving gratitude and Honor unto one another availeth much indeed!
waiting on your book release man .
The apple vision pro experiment reminds me of this experiment where people were made to wear goggles that flipped the world upside down. After a while their brains corrected for this and they started seeing the world the right way up again. When they removed the goggles at the end of the experiment everything was upside down.
I don’t agree with what he said about how if you killed someone to save five other people that it would minimize suffering. The reason I say this is because those people who are getting the organs from the man who got murdered, would eventually find out or already know that that man got murdered in order to save them. It’s not minimizing suffering, emotionally, or on a societal or overall scale.
It's the effort we take to improve things that lives on.
We take fire and combustion for granted. But somewhere in our distant past some proto-human took the time to think about the problem. They first noticed when they rubbed their hands hard together it got warmer just like the warmth from wild fires. Perhaps rubbing hands for warmth was a game at first, then a contest for warmest, then some experiments and trials. Perhaps some father got as far as making smoke with wood and then past the quest on to his children. But finally someone figured out how to make fire from scratch. And here we are today, their million year old efforts still benefiting our lives today.
Just on the topic of the imagining a triangle we can actually identify that experience through looking at brain signals. If we show someone a tree (for instance) we can now through an EEG and AI identify what that person is looking at. So we do know that seeing a tree generates an identifiable brain activity.
Sadly Alex passad away from poisoning… RIP 🪦 🕊️🕊️
One perception of wisdom, absent assumptions of morality, might be the ability intelligently integrate knowledge, observation, and experience to make decisions in alignment with one's intention. Wisdom is not necessarily equivalent with benevolence.
Good is making most people happy while pushing the pile forward.
when talking about seeing a triangle in your mind and that feels as if its an immaterial thing. Considering we know hallucinations are a real phenomenon can we not say that whatever mechanism causes hallucinations is probably the same mechanism that we are able to harness when we are imagining things? Somehow we have the ability to use some part of our brain to conjure up "hallucinations" in our mind. Obviously we don't know how we are doing this specifically but nonetheless its a process that requires our material brain and we know some people have disorders in which they see hallucinations more vividly and frequent and this involves the brain. Intuitively I don't feel like this is really even a problem for materialists.
Socrates Blue! experience of the dialog gives gnosis of blue?
This is a great conversation. I think everyone's opinion on spirituality and religion are valid since it's a very personal thing. If you believe in a higher power, you're correct and if you don't believe in a higher power, you're also correct.
It's meant to be a great mystery because various view points are what make life an adventure.
I've witnessed things that make me believe in spirituality and a higher power. Other people don't witness such things or if they do, they will try their hardest to find a logical explanation for it by calling it fluke or coincidence.
Things aren't revealed equally to everyone in the same way because then what would be the point of living if everyone follows one known path?
Holy books are the problem. If you lock beliefs for all time in a book they become outdated and irrelevant, even downright dangerous quite quickly.
It depends on the characteristics of that higher power and the reason for believing in that higher power.
Would you say that people who believed in the thunder God Zeus or Marduk were correct? Do people who believe that we're in a simulation programmed by aliens correct? I wouldn't say so.
Ashes to ashes dust to dust. That's what becomes of the body. What of consciousness? Is it also recycled into the great whole. What we put in we get out? What if life is not about me but about the whole? My part in the whole?
I have heard said that we are in God, and God is in us, and we evolve together and forever. Each wanting a deepening friendship.
Evil also exists as we know.
It is also proposed that God permits evil so that we may rally against it.
We will never really know, but sometimes we get glimpses of the divine I feel. Especially if we look out for it. What we pay attention to is important in this respect. The benevolent gaze that Iris Murdoch speaks of. Thank you for a thought inspiring discussion, gentlemen.
"Ashes to ashes dust to dust. That's what becomes of the body. What of consciousness? Is it also recycled into the great whole."
That is assuming consciousness isn't an emergent property as many would say it is. And even if it ISN'T an emergent property, once a person loses function in their brain, their consciosuness would also lose function. I don't know what exactly you're referring to by a "great whole" but if this "great whole" isn't functioning together in any meaningful way, I wouldn't expect too much of it.
"I have heard said that we are in God, and God is in us, and we evolve together and forever. Each wanting a deepening friendship. "
Okay? How would those claims be reasonable?
"Evil also exists as we know."
In a subjective sense, yes. In an objective sense? There has been no one yet to show this.
"It is also proposed that God permits evil so that we may rally against it."
Cool. I think that's a silly claim though. In my opinion, creating character development is not worth allowing billions to suffer and die.
"We will never really know, but sometimes we get glimpses of the divine I feel. Especially if we look out for it. What we pay attention to is important in this respect. The benevolent gaze that Iris Murdoch speaks of."
Would you agree that there is a possibility that you are mistaken?
of course, I could be wrong.
Consider...is music inside you or outside you? Isn't it both, and neither ?( John Vervaeke). There is so much we do not understand. Isn't there something conversing with us, though, and we with it?
@@noreenquinn3844 Music comes from sound waves from outside you. You hear noise because that is what your brain communicates with the nerves that detected the sound waves
May have missed it on the vod; anyone got suggestions on how one might proverbially step back from the microscope?
André, you gotta help him do an interview with sadhguru 🙏🏽
Brilliant. However, the extreme case of ending one life to eliminate the suffering of a few others is not the only conundrum that could arise. Even more subtle is a consideration of removing wealth from some individuals to alleviate the suffering of others. For example, millions of people are suffering in Haiti every day. Should we forcibly remove wealth from the very wealthy to improve the lives of millions of Haitians? There are studies that show that having wealth above a certain level does not improve the happiness of an individual appreciably. Will that be accepted? What will happen to ambition? What do some of the answers to this question say about human nature? Would Richard Dawkins give up his superfluous wealth to help the suffering of others? Isn't that the naturally moral thing to do?
I feel like when discussing a moral framework, there is a bit of a laziness that happens when we assume certain moral frameworks will be applicable and best across all scenarios all the time, whether those come from philosophy or dogma/religion. If we consider every issue using utilitarianism vs Kantianism (deontology) perspectives on either end of a scale, we may find some issues are best managed with one or the other, and sometimes there is a grey area and a need for debate on the issue, but not for debate on a moral philosophy that would guide the decision for the issue. This is where people are lazy and where we get into conflicts of ideology. For instance, the right is pro-life, so they are against abortion, but they also must be against IVF as it is practiced, so now there is party conflict on the issue; their dogma/moral philosophy informs them that an eleven year old who was impregnated by her rapist must deliver that child. There may not be a correct answer for what is moral in this case, but I find it lazy for people to fall back on religion or whatever moral philosophy they have and seemingly arrive at a conclusion before really teasing out the issue. The moral framework becomes less of a guide and results in intellectual laziness. We know most morals are framed in the light of harm reduction, and if that is the case then every issue is a dualism between utilitarianism and Kantianism.
In Sam's moral landscape, his moral framework about reducing suffering by avoiding the worst possible misery for everyone seems to reduce things down to a utilitarianism just phrased differently. I think he is right that science can help people resolve a lot about what would be best for society, but I also think science won't know until it knows because it will never have all the variables and know all the butterfly effects, and in the end, there is only a certain probability the outcome will be better. For instance, science could say that we should stop giving money to malaria treatments and vaccines and just invest in a cure; millions will die, but billions in the future will be saved by speeding investment; we may not know if a cure is going to come, and we are willfully withholding aid from people now, which seems unethical, so how should we act? In research studies, if a treatment seems to be working then it is immoral to withhold it from the placebo group, yet it could also limit the quality of the study. This is all to say, situations are nuanced and moral frameworks will never be perfect. We can't just go on intuition. We have to always have a discourse and come to a decision together and be willing to change our course if we arrive at new information and willing to accept the consequences of our choices understanding that we are fallible.
How do you determine which moral framework is 'better' for a given situation?
The mind is in the head not because the brain is there, but because the eyes that see the world from that angle, making you feel you you are directly behind where your eyes are looking at the world from, in your head.
If meaning and purpose is what moves us to action, and seeing that making up our own meaning and purpose is itself an action, what is the motivation for this first action?
Isn't "you must come up with your own 'subjective' morality" itself an objectively moral imperative?
Consciously it could be as basic as attempting to continue living or possibly thriving in one's current environment. Is that an "objective" imperative?
@nathanmiller9918 I believe it is. It's not something that exclusively concerns the individual subject; it's clear to me that the call to conservation and care of everything entrusted to us (including one's own life) comes from outside the individual subjectivity. Furthermore, it's a call that requires the collective's participation. Thus, it's also a collective obligation of al human societies. A society that doesn't seek the best conditions for the flourishing of all human life is an immoral society.
The only real purposes I have, is to feed my son, give him good values, teach him my knowledge, and as often as possible let him know/feel he is loved.
Then fulfill my own needs....sex, food, fiddle with my hobbies, have fun with friends, explore earth/cultures.... Gain wealth. Don't do to others what i Don't want others to do to me.
Love and make my wife feel loved and safe, support family....
Did I miss anything?
Much love with the exception of his ignorance of Greek.
I know someone out there feels my pain.
Alex needs to read Douglas Hofstadter
when alex says that death is the ultimate motivator, I think he's missing something. I think avoiding pain is more of a motivator than avoiding death. Death is a quantitative aspect of life, you are alive 1, you are dead zero. Pain, or absence of it, is the qualitative aspect which motivates us in daily course.
For example, I wouldn't hurry with anything if I were to die in a week, probably would just meet all of my loved ones and that's it. There is no magnum opus I want to leave behind to outlive me. Still I work everyday to make life better, I am still happy. This greatness seeking is more of a narcissist trait to me than the fundamental mover of life.
It's both. Immediacy of pain and total finality of death.
11:42 I think he meant to say ‘minimizing suffering not maximizing suffering’ although it can argue religion thinkers do maximize suffering 😂
The problem with how people are relating to David Hume is that people are only focusing on how he argued for empiricism from a Nietzschean experiential Übermensch perspective, and people have missed the core of his argument.
The argument can be summarized by relating the game of Rumi, which is playing cards with friends, to gambling, which is playing opponents for money.
The dichotomy of money versus perception is the real issue.
Money, in relationship to Poker, is gambling. No matter how many books are written about the "science" of Poker, all people are doing is justifying their own luck by calling it perception. There is a science of luck, and so that may not be entirely wrong, but it's still gambling first, and perception second.
And so, the proper framing of the debate isn't strictly money versus perception but gambling versus perception. Calling it "money" versus "perception" has the illusion of associating money with responsibility, and perception with a sense of wonder, and so the code of those who are on the religious side of things, tend to have the bias of "money" equals being an adult, and prioritizing "perception" means being like a child.
But that unconscious bias can be flipped into a different emotive response to ethics by calling it "gambling," versus "attentiveness."
Suddenly, religion is "childish" and "perception" is a more adult version of humility.
David Hume noted how money, as a wall of things when things are aggregated together, creates an inevitable contradiction between being human and the money.
Some people have worried that A.I. would replace people, but the problem is more serious than that. It's the problem of things replacing people! And not the type of things that imply life, but simply immobile, inanimate things that would have insulted all life.
I've often wondered how it can be that being inattentive and being unable to truly prioritize one's self in relationship to one's environment could possibly be viewed as being "irresponsible,"
The person who prioritizes money would have to assume that there is no environment to be responsible within!
And so some environmentalists have taken that logic and stopped there, not realizing that simply shifting one's focus to the "environment," is just another form of money.
In the game of rumi, a person is attentive to the cards, but doesn't take the cards too seriously, and in that environment, people tend to enjoy each other's company, rather than focus on trying to win the lottery or the pot of gold in the game of poker.
There is an irreducible secular ethic, and that is to allow room for people to be attentive, to not take life too seriously, and to prioritize relationships first, and money second.
That's why consumerism is actually the best form of cultural emptiness that allows people to connect with people without money demanding attention all the time.
Attentiveness. Responsibility to those that I love and the joy of company. Purpose tends to change and shift, but the cardinal virtue of a clear mind is always virtuous. No matter the environment, and no matter the context, a person tends to value the right to be attentive and to prioritize relationships more than anyone's "grand" vision.
The problem with "God," is that "God," is simply the collective wall of money that insulted humanity. There's no morality in that, only gambling.
The real virtue is to prioritize attentiveness and friendship.
I grew out of my own atheism awhile back, but Alex an example of the kind of atheist that I have the utmost respect for.
How does one "grow out of disbelief in god"? Do you just mean you started believing in god?
@@bubbafowpend9943lmao it means that he just opted for philosophical suicide or he just could not take it anymore
@@bubbafowpend9943It's like saying "I walked out from outside". You walked out from "outside" in to a room. It doesn't make sense
@bubbafowpend9943 I mean that it was a previous philosophical perspective that ultimately did not suit me, and therefore I outgrew it, just as anyone outgrows old habits, beliefs and ways for newer modes of Being that are conducive to oneself, or grant greater clarity.
When I say 'philosophical perspective' -- I'm referring to the epistemological, ontological and metaphysical foundations upon which an atheistic philosophy is supported. It would be a mistake to presume that atheism doesn't have implicit beliefs which uphold such a contextualization of 'Beingness'.
@@rishitjha9362 I see no valid basis for a concept as 'philosophical suicide'. There are merely people we deem 'crazy' -- and then there are crazy people who can articulate their why they believe the things they do, extraordinarily well. The latter category: we deem 'philosophers'.
Remember, my friend -- pride comes before the fall.
I do believe in "Self"
Wisdom is the end of beliefs
Ethical emotivism renders even talk about the "goodness" of truth seeking meaningless. Alex is saying a lot of boo and yeah, with absolutly no positive content, if his own view is true. But since beliefs are no more "good" than false belief, we're back to booing and yeahing at beliefs.
But good for you if you're not sold on materialism. It opens the possibility for anything you say to have meaning. Great work. Very insightful sound waves you're making, it would be so great to think that it has some meaning. And maybe some of that meaning could be better than some other meaning.