Skip to content
Modern WisdomModern Wisdom

Veganism, Atheism and Morality | Cosmic Skeptic | Modern Wisdom Podcast 103

Alex O'Connor aka Cosmic Skeptic is a YouTuber and Student at Oxford University. How many people go vegan due to a philosophical debate? And how many actively try to get the fans of their YouTube Channel to talk them out of it? Alex is one person on that list. Expect to learn the one philosophical question which Alex has trouble justifying, Alex's reasons for going vegan, whether he thinks that a less religious society has problems with morality and how religions relate to social cohesion. Extra Stuff: Follow Alex on Twitter - https://twitter.com/CosmicSkeptic Subscribe to Alex on YouTube - https://www.youtube.com/cosmicskeptic A Meat Eater's Case For Veganism - https://youtu.be/C1vW9iSpLLk Check out everything I recommend from books to products and help support the podcast at no extra cost to you by shopping through this link - https://www.amazon.co.uk/shop/modernwisdom - Listen to all episodes online. Search "Modern Wisdom" on any Podcast App or click here: iTunes: https://apple.co/2MNqIgw Spotify: https://spoti.fi/2LSimPn Stitcher: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/modern-wisdom - Get in touch in the comments below or head to... Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/chriswillx Twitter: https://www.twitter.com/chriswillx Email: modernwisdompodcast@gmail.com

Alex O'Connor (Cosmic Skeptic)guestChris Williamsonhost
Sep 17, 20191h 5mWatch on YouTube ↗

EVERY SPOKEN WORD

  1. 0:00 – 0:44

    The consistency test: what trait justifies harming animals?

    1. AS

      If I say, like, what is it about an animal, a non-human animal that allows you to kill them and torture them, in fact, and put them through factory farm processes? Like, what- what is the, what is the thing that they have or the thing that they lack that if a human were to have or to lack, you'd be okay with doing it to the human as well? Like, what is it? Is it intelligence? If it's intelligence, then can we throw people with, under a certain IQ into factory farms? Like, probably not. Or maybe it's, maybe it's self-awareness. It's like, well, is a dog self-aware? Probably. Well, well, a pig is just as self-aware as the dog is, so why aren't you this... It's- it's just about consistency, right? If someone turns around and says, "Actually, yeah, I do think it'd be a good idea to throw people with an IQ under a certain amount into factory farms," then I'd be like, "Well, at least you're being consistent."

  2. 0:44 – 3:39

    Why Alex became vegan: Singer, a public challenge, and a moment on a bus

    1. CW

      (wind blowing) I am joined by Alex O'Connor, otherwise known as Cosmic Skeptic. Alex, welcome to the show.

    2. AS

      Thank you for having me.

    3. CW

      It's a pleasure to have you on. We'll have a lot of your fans tuning in, I'm sure, as well. Uh, been a, a lot of changes recently. We've been talking about booking this appointment in with yourself for a little while, and the topics I've wanted to talk about have moved as the (laughs) as the year's-

    4. AS

      Yeah.

    5. CW

      ... gone on. Um, first thing's first, you've recently become vegan.

    6. AS

      That's right, yeah.

    7. CW

      Can you tell us the story behind that, please?

    8. AS

      Yeah, sure. Uh, well, you say, I mean, you say recently. It's recent in the, in the long scheme of things, but, uh, it- it's been maybe four or five months now. Coming on half a year soon. Um, for- for a very long time I'd been thinking about it, and when you talk about philosophy, and for some reason, atheism, it seems to lend itself, uh, your audience will always kind of say, "What do you think about this?" It, I've always found it very strange. Someone likes what you have to say on one topic and they're desperate to hear on what you have to say on- on Brexit or on veganism or whatever it is. And I've never quite understood that. It's like really enjoying a- a- a footballer's commentary on- on a game or something and say, "Oh, yeah, but what do you think about this political issue?" It's like, well, that's not what I- I- I do, I do philosophy of religion. But people wanted me to talk about veganism, so I did it in the past. And you find yourself kind of jumping through hoops, and if you listen to, um, people like Sam Harris or someone when they're asked about morality, especially because his veganism ... h- his moral, uh, philosophy is based on suffering, someone says, "Why aren't you a vegan?" And he just kind of, he- he just, he answers like a politician, you know. He's like, "Well, we have to, you know, we have to have an honest conversation about the precepts of this stuff." And it's like, man, just- just admit that- that you, you know you should be a vegan.

    9. CW

      (laughs)

    10. AS

      So I was kind of in- in that spot and I was talking to friends and essentially saying, "I'm pretty sure that veganism is- is the moral thing to do, but let me give you some arguments against it and see where we can go." Uh, and it just didn't work. And then eventually, I was like, "You know what? I'm gonna put out a video essentially saying to people, 'Here are the reasons for going vegan. Try and talk me out of it.'" And the main thing that got me thinking about it was Peter Singer's book, Animal Liberation. Peter Singer is probably the most important philosopher in my life in terms of how he's changed the way I think. I mean, there are lots of atheist philosophers who I'd be more closely associated to, because that's what I've spoken about, but they were more people who I listened to and admired, but they didn't really comp- like, like, overhaul the way that I'm living my life.

    11. CW

      (laughs)

    12. AS

      Peter Singer has done that completely with animal rights and also with his, his writings on philanthropy. Uh, so I read that and I thought, "Man, this is, this is, this is big. This is a big problem." And so I made the video. No one talked me out of it, so I went vegan. Um, it just kind of happened one day. I went cold turkey. I was on a bus into work and I saw this cat cross the road-

    13. CW

      (laughs)

    14. AS

      ... and he got scared of the bus, but because I was on the bus, it was like it was looking at me, and I saw this cat, like, backing away in fear and I just looked into its eyes and thought, "What the hell am I doing?" So I went and had a vegan breakfast and then since then, I haven't had any animal products except by accident every now and again. Uh, but that's basically how it happened.

  3. 3:39 – 5:29

    Accidental animal products: waste, intention, and different vegan philosophies

    1. CW

      We have a- a co-host on the show, Yousef, who is, uh, from a Islamic background, although he's not a believer anymore, uh, and he refers to it as being stealth porked when there's accidentally some pork-

    2. AS

      Yeah.

    3. CW

      ... products in whatever it is that he's eating, so I'm guessing that you've come-

    4. AS

      Yeah.

    5. CW

      ... come up with stealth meated.

    6. AS

      Well, you know, it's, it's an interesting debate actually what you should do in situations like that, like if- if you accidentally ... if- if a chef accidentally put some cheese on a, on a meal. Um, so for instance, the other day, I had some cheese on chips because, uh, I was with a friend and we ... it was really late at night and we ordered some chips from a, from a kebab place, you know. And, like, we expressly just didn't say cheese. And I even said, "Can I have some chips with some salt and vinegar and nothing else?" No sauce or anything. And he was like, "Yeah, sure." And- and they came just loaded with cheese and we thought, "What the hell do we do here?" If we give that back then it's going in the bin. There was no one else around, it was about to close, um, so it was like we had to eat it or it gets thrown away. So we ate it because, as far as I'm concerned, the suffering's already been wasted. It'd be a waste if it goes in the bin, it's a waste if it's used for my sensory pleasure-

    7. CW

      (laughs)

    8. AS

      ... um, but at least the pleasure's somewhat maximized in that situation as it stands. Some people, like, uh, when I spoke to a guy called Earthling Ed, a friend of mine who makes a lot of, uh, vegan content on YouTube, he ... I- I asked him about this and he said when that happens, he wouldn't, he wouldn't touch it. He- he'd rather it went to waste. He'd rather throw it in the ocean or something just because he doesn't see it as food anymore. It's like being served plastic in your meal or something.

    9. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    10. AS

      You would just, you just wouldn't be able to eat it. Uh, but for me, because it's basically a philosophical position, like you say, like, I don't have an aversion to it. Like, I'm not gonna throw up if you, if you put a steak in front of me.

    11. CW

      (laughs)

    12. AS

      Like I- I see it the same as, uh, I've always seen it, um, just not in the same moral light. So if it were like, "Here's a steak. It's gonna go to waste if you don't eat it," um, I wouldn't have a moral problem with somebody eating it in that circumstance, where some vegans would.

  4. 5:29 – 11:00

    How people usually go vegan: emotion, friends, and environmental pressure

    1. CW

      Do you think that your particular stance, uh, uh, your lineage of entry into veganism is typical? I don't know of many people-

    2. AS

      Mm-hmm.

    3. CW

      ... at least publicly who've taken it from the particular route that you have.

    4. AS

      Yeah. Uh, you know, I don't, I don't know, uh, because most of the vegans that I know personally weren't vegan until I went vegan and tried to talk them into it-

    5. CW

      Oh my god (laughs)

    6. AS

      ... and then we ended up all going together. But, you know, the- the one, the- the biggest, the- the most, uh, popular way for people to become vegan is by having friends who are vegan. Like, that's the most, uh, common way that happens because, you know, you'll share meals with them or whatever. They'll show you how it's done, you'll realize how easy it is. Um-... but I think (clears throat) it kinda, it depends on what ki- type of person you are. Like, I spend a lot of time talking to, to people who are interested in the same things as me, they're interested in philosophy, and if you're interested in philosophy, then when you have an argument presented to you, that can be a really important point, that can really change the way you think. But if you go to the average person on the street, they're not gonna be as affected by that as if you just showed them some footage. So I think it's probably the case that the majority of people who are vegan either were convinced by a friend, um, or they looked at the footage online and that kind of stuff. I, I think it's kind of an emotive response, because even for me, after all, like, I became convinced of the philosophical argument and then I had that experience with the cat that finally made me, that was the day that it happened. You need that kind of emotional motivation. Like, ethics doesn't work unless it has some kind of grounding in, in your, in your emotions, in your feelings. So I think it needs both, but I would probably say that... Yeah, it might be quite unusual, es- especially because, like, I don't see many vegans kind of going, "I'm convinced of this, someone talk me out of it." You know? They just kind of-

    7. CW

      (laughs) Yeah.

    8. AS

      ... they have, like, an emotional response and they say-

    9. CW

      Yeah.

    10. AS

      ... "Man, I'll never eat meat again. This is horrible." Or they'll do it for the environment. I think that's actually probably the big one at the moment. The most... I, I, I wouldn't be surprised to learn that the people who are going vegan now, uh, are mostly doing it for environmental purposes, because you're beginning to see this big kind of backlash of people, um, who are, who all crazy about the environment. I mean, it's the big issue at the moment. Everyone's going crazy about the environment and the oceans, and people are just saying, "Well, look, okay, so you're gonna, you're gonna stop using plastic straws to save the fish, but you won't stop eating fish to save the fish?"

    11. CW

      (laughs)

    12. AS

      Like, what, what's going on here? And people are beginning to wake up and realize that, oh, the Amazon rainforest is burning. Okay, why is that happening? Well, it's got a lot to do with the fact that people are, are eating too much beef.

    13. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    14. AS

      Oh. Oh, well, um, okay, well, let's stop using plastic. No, no. Did, did you not hear me? Like, if we stop eating so much beef, then the environment, the environmental cli- uh, the problem with the environment, it practically disappears if we went vegan tomorrow. And they're like, "Yeah, but there are, there are other..." It's like, no, look, you either care about this or you don't. And that's why I get annoyed with people like the Extinction Rebellion group who are, um, you know, blocking Parliament, blocking the roads in London and things. Um, I understand that direct action is needed sometimes. You know, I, I c- I can get behind a bit of civil disobedience. But, my God, if this is important enough for you to bring London traffic to a standstill and stop airplane from taking off, then it's important enough for you to choose something else on the menu. Like, come on, I, I, I can't give anyone the time of day who knows ... Some people don't know, and that's fine, but if you know how important the agricultural industry is to the rise of climate change and you're still one of these, these steadfast campaigners getting people to, to do everything they can and, and saying, "You're not allowed to travel," you know, "Parliament isn't allowed to concentrate on anything else, this is the most important thing in the world," but you're still eating red meat and you're still eating fish, then I- I just don't know what to say to you.

    15. CW

      People picking their, uh, morality piecemeal.

    16. AS

      Yeah.

    17. CW

      I want this bit, but I don't want the other bit. I want the bit that doesn't inconvenience me and makes me look really cool to my friends, but I don't want the thing that requires me to learn some new recipes in the kitchen.

    18. AS

      Exactly that. And, and, uh, you know, I don't want people to get me wrong. I'm not saying that they shouldn't be campaigning. I'm just saying that if they're, if they're campaigning that much, then they should kind of take it to its logical conclusion. It's like if someone were, um, campaigning to, to end, uh, end a form of slavery but, but supporting another form of slavery. It's like, it's not a bad thing that you're campaigning to end this form of slavery, but you've got to be consistent about this if you want people to take you seriously. Like, if you want the people who are interested in the philosophy behind your movement, if you want people who are interested in the arguments behind your movement to take you seriously, you have to be consistent. It's gonna be too easy for people who are, who are climate skeptics to turn around and say, "Well, if you care so much about the environment, then why aren't you doing anything about your diet?" And you're just kind of ... You, you, you'd be stumbling around and you won't really know what to say. So, um, I think, yeah, you've got to, you've got to be consistent to, if only just to avoid the kind of criticism that you're going to receive if you don't do that.

    19. CW

      Yeah. I've got some party friends. Uh, we run, I run club nights, it's been my job for the last 13 years and in the clubbing industry, there are (clears throat) , there's an increasing woke movement, which is very, very interesting. And recently one of my friends posted something online talking about woke promoters. There's quite a lot of them down south, people that are going vegan and vegetarian, but notice the fact that they were concerned at the plight of animals and factory farming and stuff like that, but were more than happy to put 60 quid into a drug dealer's hand to get some cocaine which had been made off the back of children in Brazil and in Mexico and all of the sort of drug gangs. So I think you're right, there's, there's layers and levels to this sort of a thing.

    20. AS

      Yeah.

  5. 11:00 – 17:30

    The philosophical case: speciesism, analogies to racism/sexism, and scale of suffering

    1. CW

      So one of the things that I wanted you to present to the listeners was, could you give us the arguments that most compelled you to go vegan?

    2. AS

      Yeah. Well, it's more, I mean, I, I kind of look at it in the reverse. I say that if you're going to do something that involves, uh, causing suffering, then you have to be able to justify it. And so it was more the arguments in favor of eating meat disappeared. I mean, if you want an argument against eating meat or, uh, let's say, 'cause eating meat intrinsically isn't wrong, but I kind of, I use the word, the phrase, like, eating meat to be synonymous with the, the mistreatment of animals, although that's probably an unfair thing to do in many ways, but sometimes that's what my vocabulary does. But if you want an argument against torturing animals, then it's like most people will be content if you just say, "Well, would you be okay if I tortured a dog? I mean, how would you feel if, if you just saw a dog being beaten on the street? Like, like, what would you do?" Um, and they'll say, "Well, that's awful." And it's like, "Well, you're already convinced then. Like, we don't actually need to get into the meta ethic of, of why it's wrong to, to make animals suffer. I just have to show you that torturing a, a dog is not morally different from torturing a pig." Um, some people might say, "Well, I would- wouldn't have a problem with that. Like, why should I care about the dog?" In which case, it gets a bit more difficult. You have to kind of present a meta ethical position about suffering. Um-... which, I don't know, it, it gets complicated. But the main way that I get people to go vegan, philosophically speaking, is with an argument from consistency. If you're against racism and sexism, you should probably be against speciesism too. And that doesn't mean seeing people as equal. That's one of the big things that Peter Singer pointed out. He said that, like, look, races aren't equal. Sexes aren't equal. We have loads and loads of differences. We have different proportions, we have different languages and cultures and different, different, all sorts of things. Like, nobody's equal. And even in ter- terms of skill, like different people, um, have different skill levels and intrinsically they have different strengths and weaknesses. Um, he said, you know, if political equity, if, if political equal treatment was based on actual equality of people, then there would be no equality. There would be no basis for it. He says it's not like the ... Being anti-racist isn't saying all races are equal. It's saying that despite our differences, we're all worth the same morally. Uh, and it's the same thing with animals, except it, it ... You don't have to say that we're worth the same. You just have to say that we're, we're afforded the same moral, um, uh, the same kind of ... Well, you, you're kind of included in the thought process, at least. Like, uh, if you are in favor of equality of the sexes, you don't have to give men abortion rights, 'cause that doesn't make any sense. In the same way, you can be in favor of, of, uh, treating animals with respect and giving them kind of a, an e- equal consideration is the phrase that Peter Singer uses. It doesn't mean we're gonna let them vote. It doesn't mean we're gonna make them, uh, treat them as though they're the same as humans or, or even have the same moral worth as humans. It just means that we treat them as much, uh, with as much as, as, as they deserve. So if I say like, "What is it about an animal, a non-human animal that allows you to kill them and torture them, in fact, and put them through factory farm processes?" Like what, what is the, what is the thing that they have or the thing that they lack that if a human were to have or to lack you'd be okay with doing it to the human as well? Like, what is it? Is it intelligence? If it's intelligence, then can we throw, um, y- c- can we throw people with, uh, under a certain IQ into factory farms? Like, probably not, or maybe it's, maybe it's self-awareness. It's like, well, is a dog self-aware probably, but, well, a pig is just as self-aware as the dog is. So why aren't you this ... It's, it's just about consistency, right? If someone turns around and says, "Actually, yeah, I do think that if we, um, I do think it'd be a good idea to throw people with an IQ under a certain amount into factory farms," then I'd be like, "Well, at least you're being consistent." Right? The conversation shifts.

    3. CW

      (laughs) That's some strange views, but yes, you, you're being consistent.

    4. AS

      I'm, yeah, I'm no longer saying now, "Here's why you should be vegan." It's, "Here's why you should not want to kill people who are dumb." Right?

    5. CW

      Yeah. Yeah.

    6. AS

      The conversation shifts. But if somebody is on the same page, which most people are, uh, i- it sounds absurd to compare, like racism to the treatment of animals. But if anything, like if you quantify suffering, if what you care about is suffering, and I think most atheists at the very least do care about suffering as the basis of their morality, then animals can feel suffering just as we can. It's in different ways. Like they might feel, they might not feel the same kind of fears and anxieties as we do. They don't have anxiety over debt, for instance. That's a very human-specific, uh, suffering. But when it comes to physical pains and things, like these things might be comparable, right? We can't do it in practice, but if you think pain can be quantifiable, which some people do, some people don't, then you might say, "Well, yeah, racism is awful, but with the state of racism at the moment in the United States, like the amount of pain is not as much as the amount of pain in the animal industry." You might agree with that, you might not, but they are comparable at the very least. Like it, they can be analogous. And if you think about the sheer numbers involved, like this is, I mean, Peter got in a lot of trouble years ago for doing this Holocaust On Your Plate campaign where they made a comparison saying like, "12 million people perished in the Holocaust between, you know, the, the years of World War II, between '39 and '45, that 12 million, um, were killed." And then they'd just point out that the s- like the same number of non-human animals are tortured and killed every single hour in the United States alone for food. And people were like, "How the hell could you possibly compare them?" It's like, well, well think about that for a second. Like even if you think that one is way worse than the other, just think about the numbers there. Like 50 billion animals being tortured and killed every year. Not for war, not, not for some social progre- j- just because people think they taste nice. Like that's insane. Right? And so if you begin to, to make people see that animals can feel suffering and you begin to make them see how that's analogous to our own suffering, like evolutionarily speaking, rationally speaking, I have no reason not to be a racist. I mean, I'm never gonna, I'm never gonna suffer from racism. Like in, in a, in a soci- in a, in a society that's dominated by white people, I mean. Um, I'm never gonna suffer, let's say, from, from anti-black racism, right? No, it's, it's not gonna be a problem for me. So why, why would I be against it? It, it's a rational thing. It's a moral thing. It's like I, I tap into my empathy, I tap into societal cohesion, all, all of these kinds of things. And I realize that suffering is bad no matter who's suffering from it. Uh, and if I can do the same thing for them, then I can do the same thing for, for non-human animals as well.

    7. CW

      (inhales) (sighs) It is a compelling argument. It is a, it is a compelling argument. I think speciesism is definitely what most people are drawing that line at. It's an extension of us just being tribal.

    8. AS

      Yeah.

  6. 17:30 – 23:52

    Sentience boundaries: pain/pleasure, the veil of ignorance, and the 'plants feel pain' objection

    1. CW

      The same way that it would've, it would've protected us a long time ago. Um, does consciousness and suffering, are they, do they go hand in hand?

    2. AS

      Uh, I think, uh, it depends how you're defining consciousness. Like the only thing that I care about when it comes to morality is the ability to feel pain, uh, and the ability to feel pleasure, which someone like Singer would point out, uh, is kind of predicated on or is the basis for preference. Like if, if a creature has such thing as preference, then they, then they have moral worth, at least some minuscule level of mora- moral worth. So if you have some creature that's somehow conscious but doesn't feel pleasure and pain, then I'd, wouldn't consider them as part of the moral framework. Uh, because if you didn't feel pleasures and pains, like you'd essentially just be a vegetable. It's, it's preferences that motivate action. You only do things because you want to do them. Like that, that's what motivates action. Desire motivates action. And in order to have desire, you need to have some conception of pleasure and pain because desire is predicated upon pleasure itself. So without pleasure and pain, I don't know if consciousness can even make sense, but if it can, then that's not the important thing for me. It's just the pleasure and pain.

    3. CW

      I'm sitting down with Nir Eyal, uh, on Monday to discuss his new book, Indistractable. And in that, he cites a couple of studies that, uh, he suggests show that there isn't such a thing as pleasure chasing, there is only pain avoidance?

    4. AS

      Mm-hmm.

    5. CW

      Um, and that was an interesting eye-opener for me, just thinking about the way that we live our lives and what it is that we go towards, and applies even more pressure to avoiding discomfort, avoiding suffering-

    6. AS

      Yeah.

    7. CW

      ... as you're, as you're saying here. So there must be a spectrum of suffering and of consciousness, and there must be a bottom end. There must be a line where animals no longer are animals and become vegetables. There's some animals that are more responsive to stimuli, uh, some, some plants that are more responsive to stimuli than animals are, like coral or limpets. How, where do we, how do you draw the line there?

    8. AS

      Yeah.

    9. CW

      Where does the rubber meet the road with that?

    10. AS

      So it, it's all about the maximization of pleasure, or I'd rather frame it, actually, uh, as, as your guest would in, uh, in a, in the terms of minimization of suffering because, um, a lot of philosophical pessimists, uh, so for instance, Arthur Schopenhauer pointed out, um, in his most famous essay, he, he essentially said, "Look, all these philosophers have it totally wrong. Everyone thinks that pleasure is, like, the affirmative thing and pain is, like, the absence of pleasure," or something along that lines. It's like, no, the, the most real thing, the most active thing is, is pain, and all pleasure is just some kind of negation of pain. It's all about avoiding pain. Um, or, uh, or whether that be physical pain or, like, philosophical pain and then, and not, not being able to understand the world and absurdism, Camus said that all of the meaning of life is, is essentially just finding excuses not to kill yourself. Like, that's all that life-

    11. CW

      (laughs)

    12. AS

      That's all that life is, you know. Um, I think it, it makes sense to view the world in that way and if we do, then we have to, we have to figure out the calculation that's most going to minimize suffering. A way to think about it, how, how you would frame the world, like, where you would draw the line, whether you'd, whether you'd be okay with us killing plants and trees or whatever, is to apply John Rawls' principle, um, the, the veil of ignorance. John, John Rawls should've been a vegan, um, because he quite famously came up with this analogy that if you didn't know if you were going to be born Black or white or, uh, lower class or upper class, whatever it was, like, you didn't know what social characteristics you had, um, but you're about to be born into the world and you have no idea where you're gonna be, where you're gonna be born, let's say, like, in the United States, for instance. Design society before you get into that society. So design society before you know where you're going to be in it. So he concluded you probably wanna have, uh, a, a capitalist economy so that if you have an opportunity to make money, you can do so and you can be free to, to, to make as much money as you can, but with some kind of social safety net so that if you're born into, into areas with no economic opportunity, you'll have some help. It's like that would be fair because you realize that that's, that's gonna better your chances. Now, do, just do the same thing, but apply it to you don't know what thing you're going to be. You could be a tree, you could be a bush, you could be a chair, um, you could be a pig, you could be a, a human, and design society. The question is would you have an agricultural industry in that society? Of course you bloody wouldn't. Like, uh, chickens outnumber humans three to one. You've got three times more chance of being a chicken.

    13. CW

      (laughs)

    14. AS

      Are you gonna be okay with those odds? Or are you gonna say, "No, no, let's not have KFC in this society." And I say to you, "Well, well, no, you don't understand because you could be born a human and you'll get so much pleasure from eating chicken, and if you are born a chicken, like, chickens have so much less intelligence and, and you, you won't be smart, you won't, you won't, you won't feel the pain as much." Like, you'll be, and you'd be like, "No, that's, that's insane. I'm not gonna run that risk." I, I would rather have the chance of being a human and have to not eat chicken than run the risk of being a chicken in, in the animal industry, right? So now the question would be would you be okay being a tree or a plant? It's like, well, as far as I'm concerned, they, they don't feel pain, so I probably wouldn't have a problem with that. But the thing is, let's say that plants can feel pain. This is an important thing because people often bring it up as a bit of a meme. It's like, um, it's like when an atheist, someone asks an atheist, like, uh, "But, but where do you find your meaning?" Or something. And every atheist just rolls their eyes like, "How have you not... Like, this is just ridiculous." Uh, it's the same thing with the plants thing. People always bring it up. It's like, "But, but plants can feel pain." And the vegans go, "Oh, for God's sake."

    15. CW

      (laughs)

    16. AS

      And what most of them say is they go, "No, they can't feel pain. That's ridiculous. Shut up." What I say is, "Okay, let's say they can feel pain. You understand that the vast majority of plants that are, that are destroyed are not fed to humans, they're fed to livestock, right?" Like, where do you think your protein gets its protein from?

    17. CW

      (laughs)

    18. AS

      They're eating plants as well. If you think, if you think plants can, can suffer, then the best way to minimize plants being killed is to go vegan because then we won't be feeding them to the livestock. So even if plants can feel pain, the way to minimize that pain is to go vegan. Like, veganism doesn't eliminate suffering. You're still killing animals. You're still, you're still, uh, destroying land to grow crops on and things like that. It's just about minimizing it because that's already happening right now in order to grow crops that we then feed to cows, which we then kill and eat. Like, just cut out the middleman and we'll reduce the suffering even, even more. So you're never gonna be able to eliminate suffering. So if plants can feel pain, then that would just be a sorry fact of existence, but it would be one that we could manage by still going vegan.

  7. 23:52 – 24:10

    Lab-grown meat and ‘no suffering, no problem’

    1. CW

      Yeah. Would you say that moving forward, if you were able to create the equivalent of a philosophical zombie animal, some meat that's being grown in a chess- test tube or whatever it might be, what would your stance be on that?

    2. AS

      If it can't feel suffering, then no problem. That's it. No suffering, no problem.

  8. 24:10 – 28:46

    Preference vs suffering: is painless killing wrong?

    1. CW

      Do you think that most vegans hold that view?

    2. AS

      Uh, I wouldn't, I wouldn't know. I mean, uh, a lot of vegans I've spoken to, most vegans I've spoken to who didn't go vegan at the same time as me for the same reasons, uh, h- give a, give a lot of weight to, uh, to preference. So I was speaking to someone in London recently. I, I do some events sometimes and it's always nice because, uh, people will come who've seen your channel. So you know you get an opportunity to meet people. And I'm, I'm very used to people coming up and saying, you know, um, "I like the videos you did on atheism. I like this moral. Can we talk about the, the, the nature of morality or something?" But I-... I, I kind of forgot that I'd done the veganism thing so recently-

    3. CW

      (laughs)

    4. AS

      ... and someone ca- someone comes up to me, uh, the, these people come up to me and say, "Hi, we're, we're some of your, your vegan viewers." And I was like, "Wow, this is the first time. This has, this has ever ha- I've never had this before." So I was, I was talking to them about it, and they were talking about preference. Um, the idea being that, uh, because animals want to live, they have a preference to live, we should respect that just intrinsically. Like, if you were to go and kill an animal, uh, behind its back with no suffering, would that be a problem? And I'm of the opinion that it's all about pleasure and pain. So I would say, like, the preference alone isn't enough to say that you shouldn't kill that animal. Um, and, and they had a problem with that. They were like, no, there, there is some moral worth to, to preference. You're, you're getting rid of potential pleasure, that kind of thing.

    5. CW

      Mm-hmm. Mm-hmm.

    6. AS

      Um, I reject that because, for instance, if you're talking about potential pleasure having worth, then you get into a whole, uh, problem with, like, abortion. And I'm not just talking about the normal debates surrounding abortion. I'm talking, like, the idea that you, you doing this podcast instead of going and having sex right now-

    7. CW

      (laughs)

    8. AS

      ... is preventing potential pleasure. But that's, that's just absurd. What, what-

    9. CW

      Right, Alex, that's it. We're just go- we're gonna have-

    10. AS

      Yeah. (laughs)

    11. CW

      ... to leave it there, mate, I'm afraid. Sorry, Omar.

    12. AS

      Right. I mean, that, that's the excuse I always use, right?

    13. CW

      (laughs)

    14. AS

      It, it... But the thi- that's, that's an absurd argument, obviously. And, and, you know, I wouldn't want anyone to take that argument seriously. But that just demonstrates why potential pleasure, at least on its own, isn't enough to justify it. So, uh, they say, for instance, "Well, then would you be okay with going and, and killing a human being without them feeling any suffering and without them knowing it was coming?" And it's like, okay, I'm gonna need to qualify this, but yes. A- and, and the eyebrows (laughing) float to the back of the head. It's like the reason that wouldn't work is because, firstly, the very fact that, that we would be aware in our moral system that it's okay to, to do that would cause panic and suffering. So, so even just allowing that as part of the moral zeitgeist would lower suffering, which means e- even, even allowing that to be thought of as moral is immoral in itself. So we shouldn't do it.

    15. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    16. AS

      Um, but besides, there's so many more complications with things like friends and family and then the effect on society and things like that, that don't apply to, to chickens and pigs.

    17. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    18. AS

      Um, like, if you take one chicken out of a, out of a herd of, of 100 and kill it without it knowing and without it feeling any suffering, there's not gonna be any real social implications for that. Although there argu- there are arguments to say that, um, that animals that, that are social animals will really notice. Like, like I had this big (laughs) discussion with, uh, Armin Navabi and, uh, and some other YouTubers in London recently about chicken depression.

    19. CW

      (laughs)

    20. AS

      Um, there was a friend of ours who, who knows someone who runs a, runs a chicken farm, and he was talking about, "No, no, I th- I think chickens can, can get, like, depressed. Like, you see them when, when their family are killed. Like, they get upset." And Armin's like, "That, that's... Chichens can't get depressed." And we were arguing about chicken depression and, and so, so some people would say that even if you go and kill an animal without it knowing, that's gonna be a problem because its friends and family will know. But then, again, the reason that would be wrong wouldn't be because of the intrinsic removal of the preference of the animal you're killing, but because of the suffering of the other animals.

    21. CW

      Colossal damage.

    22. AS

      So it still comes down to the suffering. Exactly, yeah. So it- it's never the preference alone, um, that I think has a moral worth. It's always the suffering. And I think that's where I would differ from many other vegans who, who give more... They, they almost take a kind of sanctity of life approach. They're like, "We need to respect life." Or they, they take a kind of, um, "Animals are here for our use" kind of thing. It's just like a philosophical deontological principle. For me, it's like there's no special thing about it. Like, veganism isn't, isn't a special thing in and of itself for me. It's just a derivative of my general moral principle of minimizing suffering. Like, and the same reason, uh, uh, that I'm a vegan for the same reason that I'm not a racist. It's, it's like it just kinda follows naturally, right?

    23. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    24. AS

      I- it's not a, not a specific thing in its own regard. Like, like, uh, being a, being an atheist doesn't really fall in that category. Like, that's a whole different area of discussion. That's a whole different argument. Um, but the veganism thing is just, just well under this umbrella of, of all, kind of, all moral principles that I hold, the same reason that I wouldn't beat a dog on the street, the same reason that I'm against domestic violence, the same reason I'm against racism or, or whatever it is. Like, it's all part of the same thing. It's all just about minimizing suffering.

  9. 28:46 – 32:49

    Appeals to nature: predators, moral agency, and uncomfortable comparisons

    1. CW

      How do animals that kill other animals fit into this paradigm? Have you thought about that?

    2. AS

      Yeah, I have, and people say, you know, "You don't judge the lion for dining on the, dining on the gazelle. So why should I be judged for doing it?" It's like, okay, well, lions also will, uh, will murder other lion populations and impregnate the females to, to repopulate the, the pride with their own children and murder the children that exist there already. Should we do that as well?

    3. CW

      (laughs)

    4. AS

      Like, I, I s- look, I-

    5. CW

      Hard, hard press to roll that one forward.

    6. AS

      Yeah. Y- you might base your moral, uh, your moral framework on that of wild animals. I, I think more highly of humans than, than, than that, you know. Like, in, in the same way that if you had a, a severely disabled child who had a tumor pressing against the part of their brain that dealt with rational thought, and they, and they kind of smacked someone in the face, you wouldn't hold them morally responsible for it. It, it's... But just because we don't hold that child morally responsible for doing things that we would consider wrong, we can't then turn around and do immoral things to them, right? So ju- just because we don't hold... Like, you could take an, an intensely disabled person who just was totally out of control of any of their actions. We wouldn't hold them morally responsible for trying to hit us, but we can still hold ourselves morally responsible for trying to hit them.

    7. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    8. AS

      In the same way, we don't hold animals morally responsible for, for raping each other or for killing each other or eating each other. But that doesn't mean we can do it to them as well. I mean, are we okay to have sex with animals? Are w- are w- some people would say yes. That's an interest- that's another interesting discussion actually, because, like, 'cause, like, you know, I, I would, I would argue that... And I don't have to take this route because I'm a vegan, but if you're okay with putting animals in factory farms, then I don't understand how you could be against people having sex with them because then at least there's a chance they might enjoy it. And even if they don't enjoy it-

    9. CW

      (laughs)

    10. AS

      ... it can't be much worse than being put through a factory farm. So, like-

    11. CW

      (laughs)

    12. AS

      ... that's a whole nother discussion-

    13. CW

      Wow.

    14. AS

      ... you know what I mean? But to, to, to keep to the question-

    15. CW

      Yeah.

    16. AS

      ... the answer, uh, th- the answer that I would give is my moral system is based on what I consider to be rational thought processes, not trying to mirror the animal kingdom. There, there's no might makes right. There's no-... a- appeal to nature or anything like that. It's just about minimization of suffering.

    17. CW

      I think that difference between the animals for eating and animals for sex-

    18. AS

      Mm-hmm.

    19. CW

      ... that you've come up with there probably, uh, strikes a chord with what most people, w- what the reason that most people choose to go vegan. It's that much more visceral, emotive response, right? Because when you think about the killing, you're somehow removed. It's not you that's doing it, you're just doing the eating.

    20. AS

      Yeah.

    21. CW

      Whereas with the sex, like, you're there.

    22. AS

      Yeah. (laughs) Yeah.

    23. CW

      Like anyone, anyone who's watched Black Mirror, like ...

    24. AS

      (laughs) Yeah.

    25. CW

      There's-

    26. AS

      It's really strange though, isn't it? I- it's like people have this, people have this weird aversion. Like if, if, if it came out in the newspaper that, um, that some farmer had been serially raping his pigs, people would be like, "That's disgusting." It's like, okay, so-

    27. CW

      (laughs)

    28. AS

      ... you're okay with this person, like, torturing them, skinning them, putting a bolt through their brain. But as soon as they put their dick in it, like, "Oh, no."

    29. CW

      (laughs)

    30. AS

      "That's a step too far." Like, like, come on. Like, what are you doing here? It's the same thing when people, um, I, it's like what Chris Hitchens said in, in his, in his memoir. Uh, he, he was so ex- uh, so Chris, Chris Hitchens wrote a memoire, uh, or wrote a, or wrote a book, a biography of, uh, Thomas Jefferson, who famously owned very many slaves, including Sally Hemmings, who he's believed to have sexually assaulted and having a child with. And, and he pointed out that historians, uh, are quick to kind of defend Jefferson and say, "No, no, no. He didn't, he didn't sexually assault Sally Hemmings." And they, and they get kind of upset by the idea that this, this hero of American history turns out that he just as sexually assaulted some woman. And Hitchens is like, "Oh, but they were okay with the whole owning her, like they were, they were okay with h- with, with him owning this woman as property." But the, the moment it's suggested that he tries to have sex with them, like, it suddenly becomes this horrible thing and they can't believe their hero has been stained in this way. It's like, come on, give me a break here. Uh, and I think it's kind of, that, that's analogous to, to the same thing with, with having sex with animals. It's like, if you think it's bad to have sex with a horse or a pig, then maybe you are giving pigs moral worth. Maybe you do care about their suffering, and if you do care about their suffering, then my God, stop buying McDonald's.

  10. 32:49 – 38:14

    Why people don’t change: ‘but bacon though’ and the problem of motivating morality

    1. CW

      It's people taking their moral virtues piecemeal again, isn't it? It's picking what they want from, from different areas. So what do you think? Uh, th- what strikes me and the thing that I've thought when I watched your, your first video, uh, A Meat Eater's Case for Veganism, which will be linked in the show notes below, if you just wanna see what Alex is talking about. Really cool video. Um, what struck me with that was the fact that you then decided, on the basis of quite a cerebral approach to veganism, that you would commit because you wanted to live in line, you wanted your life to live in line with your moral, your moral standing.

    2. AS

      Mm-hmm.

    3. CW

      I think that, to me, that friction in the system or that slippage in the system is probably why people don't make the jump. They think, "Well, okay, compelling argument, Alex. Like, you know, yeah, maybe you're right. Maybe you're right about that, but I just can't be arsed."

    4. AS

      Yeah. Then essentially the question is, is why be moral? And that's a difficult question to answer. That's a whole different ballgame. It's like people will tell me, it's the, it's the one question that I can't really answer very well. It's the one kind of impenetrable, uh, impenetrable boundary, is when people say, "Yeah, okay. I accept that it's the moral thing to do, but I'm just an immoral person." It's like, all I can really do is tell you how to be moral. Like, all, all, the w- that (laughs) that sounds incredibly, uh-

    5. CW

      (laughs)

    6. AS

      ... uh, preachy and self-righteous. I, I mean, all I can tell you, what I, what I mean by that is, all I can tell you is what I philosophically believe to be the moral thing to do, right? That's what I mean by that.

    7. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    8. AS

      Um, I can't really tell you why you should be moral. Uh, there are philosophical arguments to do that. But all I'm saying is, if you want to be moral, this is what I think, th- this is how I think it, it should be achieved, right? Uh, the question of why should I be moral, why should I be, be, be arsed is like, I don't know, but what if you... The way that I usually approach these people is I say, "Okay, let's say you were having a conversation with someone who was a racist or a neo-Nazi or something like that, and they said, 'Uh, you know what? That's a good point. Maybe, you know, may- maybe Jews are all right after all. May- maybe the moral thing to do is to not be anti-Semitic, but I guess I'm just an immoral person. (laughs) " It's like, w- what do you...

    9. CW

      (laughs)

    10. AS

      Whoa. Like, like, w- who is this person? Like, you'd think they were insane or something.

    11. CW

      Yeah.

    12. AS

      And, and that's the thing, like people, when you talk to people about veganism, like the con- conversation usually ends with them kind of going like, "Yeah, wow. (laughs) Oh, man. You make some, (laughs) you make some good points. Cool. Yeah. Oh, but, but bacon though."

    13. CW

      (laughs)

    14. AS

      Are, are, are you kidding me? Like, this, this isn't just some kind of like interesting philosophical musing, right?

    15. CW

      Discussion. Yes.

    16. AS

      This is, this is the most important moral issue of our time. It's like wha- it, it, it's, it, it's, is it like a nervous laughter that you're just kind of laughing it off? Like, "Oh, yeah. Good point. Oh, dear." It's, it's like, think about this seriously. Come on. Like, how would you feel if you were living in a society and you were turning around and saying, "Guys, how the hell are we owning people as slaves right now? This needs to end." And someone goes like, "Oh man, that, uh, that's a good point. That's a-"

    17. CW

      But, but cotton.

    18. AS

      "But cotton though. Yeah." It's like, "Oh man." And it's like, hold on, but you can... I- a- and it's the same thing, it's like people turn around and go, "But, but like, so, so you don't own slaves?" And you're like, "Yes." And they're like, "But, but, uh, but where do you get your cotton?" It's like, "Wh- what, what, what are you talking about?" It's like, "But, but you're a vegan, so where, where do you get your protein?" "W- th- the same, the same place that your protein gets your protein from." Like...

    19. CW

      (laughs)

    20. AS

      It's just absurd. Uh, and it's like these people have never thought about it before, and most of them haven't ever thought about it before because it's not something that's, that's talked about in mainstream philosophy. Like, if you think about how important the moral issue actually is, uh, it's something that in the future will be, will be one of the biggest political issues of our time. But can you imagine Boris Johnson and Jeremy Corbyn going at each other talking about the nuances of the ethics of factory farming? I, I don't think, uh, I don't think it's e- it's even imaginable. But, like, they would do it on almost any other issue. They do it on, on disability benefits. They do it on the NHS. They... And it's like, many of the issues that are talked about regularly in Parliament are nowhere near as important as the suffering and torture of sen- of, of s- over 50 billion sentient creatures every single year. But i- it just seems absurd to suggest that that would be something that would be talked about in Parliament. But that just goes to show how, how utterly unthinking we are when it comes to this area of ethics. It's like our, it's, it's our biggest ethical blind spot.

    21. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    22. AS

      I- i- peop- people just...... it's not like people don't know it's there, but it's staring us in the face. And all you have to kind of do is, is just, is just readjust your sight a little bit. It, it doesn't take much more than that. It's not like, it's not like something that people think is totally, totally okay and, and would fully defend. It's just, it, you just need to start thinking about it. That's it. And, and there's no way... Like, if you saw a book on the shelf, for instance, um ... Th- this is a point that was made. There's a book called Eating Animals: Should We Stop? I can't remember who it's by, but he made this point, he was like, in the introduction or something, he says, "I bet you assume what my conclusion is here." Like, the, the book title just says, Should We Stop Eating Animals? Right? Th- that, that's all it says. But I bet you, you've already assumed that I'm gonna conclude that, yeah, we should stop, haven't you? Now, why is that?

    23. CW

      (laughs)

    24. AS

      Like, it's probably because you know that anyone who's given it enough thought to write a book about it has probably become convinced that it's wrong to do. People know that if you think about it enough, then you'll become convinced that it's wrong. They're just not willing to do the thinking.

    25. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    26. AS

      And I wasn't willing to do it either. But the moment that I committed to it, like, you just have to go vegan. And it's a lot easier than people think it is. It's so easy. And the more people do it, the easier it gets still.

  11. 38:14 – 42:59

    Activism strategy: why Alex resists ‘Meatless Mondays’ compromises

    1. CW

      I wonder what the, uh, equivalent success ratio would be if the, the government employed Alex O'Connor, Cosmic Skeptic, to do the marketing campaign for pro-veganism versus the more visceral response of PETA. Like yours, it would be different sort of delivery and definitely some different imagery.

    2. AS

      I think so, although I, I wouldn't, um, I wouldn't really trust myself as a, as a campaign. I go toe-to-toe with a lot of vegans. Um, I argued with Peter Singer about this. I argue with Earthling Ed about this. I argue with non-vegans like Armin Navabi about this. Um, e- essentially th- so things, things that are, like, good in terms of progress that are, like, politically good moves. So, uh, for instance, in a lot of the colleges at Oxford, they have, like, meatless Mondays in the halls, right? Th- that they have, like-

    3. CW

      It's a good name. Th- straight off the bat, it's good marketing.

    4. AS

      Yeah. Well, that, that's ... It, it's all supposed to be very fun and friendly and everything. And, and people, people ... I've argued with people about this 'cause they, they, they assume that I'm gonna be all for. Like, if my college were like, "We're gonna start doing meatless Mondays," people would think that I'd be all in favor of that. I c- I can't put my name behind a campaign like that. That's why I wouldn't want, wanna run a vegan campaign, 'cause technically that is reducing animal suffering. But I can't put my name behind giving up meat on Mondays for the same reason that as an abolitionist in the 1800s I wouldn't want to have put my name behind a campaign that says, "How about you give up your slaves on the weekend? Let them ha- let them have a few days off." Like, that's not what I'm going for here. Like, I think this is wrong and needs to stop. Uh, that, that ... If I wanna be ethically consistent, I have to advocate for that position.

    5. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    6. AS

      People would call that a kind of absolutism or fundamentalism. Well, maybe that's the best way to describe it, but in the same way that you're probably an absolutist or a fundamentalist when it comes to your opposition to, to human slavery, you probably wouldn't accept compromises.

    7. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    8. AS

      You, you'd say, "You've got to stop doing this now." Like, full stop. There's no excuse for this. Um, so it's, it's a difficult position. That's why, that's why I wouldn't consider myself an activist and, and, and wouldn't do much activism along those kinds of, of progressive means. But I don't wanna hinder people who are doing that, because like I say, it is technically reducing suffering.

    9. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    10. AS

      But I can't be the one to be in charge of that. Like, that's just, that's not, that's not gonna go-

    11. CW

      Coming at it from multiple different angles, right? Coming at it-

    12. AS

      Yeah.

    13. CW

      ... from your particular stance, which is quite cerebral, coming at it from this more-

    14. AS

      Mm.

    15. CW

      ... emotive, visceral response stance and then this, I suppose, uh, habitual, slow, habitual move where you s- ... Well, look, you got away with Monday. You got away with, with, without meat on Monday. Lo- what now-

    16. AS

      Yeah.

    17. CW

      ... how about if we do it Tuesday?

    18. AS

      Yeah, exactly. Well, you know, I, I consider, like, I think about moral progress and you kind of ... Like you say, you have to have all the components. If you think about, like, the American Revolution, you know. You, you needed the, you needed the Jefferson to draft the document. You needed the Washington to be the emotive leader. But you also needed the Thomas Paine who wrote the essay and said, "No, no. Like, forget this, forget this representation nonsense. W- we're gonna, we're gonna be independent." Like, a- at the time of the revolution, nobody really wanted independence. They, they just wanted a bit of representation in Parliament and, and for the taxes to be, um, to be fairer. And Thomas Paine writes this essay that says, "Independence now. No, no exceptions."

    19. CW

      (laughs)

    20. AS

      "We're against tyranny, full stop." And he put out the essay. And no one remembers Thomas Paine because he wasn't the one who actually went on and made the social progress happen, because you can't just do it like that. But you need i- ... Without that essay, without that philosophical, um, push, then the rest of it wouldn't have happened. And I, I think if I'm gonna play a role in the liberation of animals, then I want it to be a kind of, like you say, a sy- a kind of armchair philosophy. I wanna write the essays that, that ... I wanna write the essays, I wanna do the arguments that, that are arguing for the absolutist moral position, um, so that the moderates and the progressives have a philosophical basis on which to base their political moves. But I couldn't take part in that side of things, really. And, you know, maybe I will in the future. Maybe that will change. I don't know. But the thing that I don't think can ever really change is my conviction that this is the way forward, that this is what's ... Not only what should happen, but what's going to happen, um, especially with people caring so much about the environment right now. It's not gonna take much, I think, to c- convince the next generation or maybe even the generation after that, that we need to stop eating meat at the very least and probably all dairy products. 'Cause once you give up meat, it's not a big step to then also give up dairy. Um, yeah. I, I don't know. I, I don't know what role I'll play, but I'm not big on the whole, the whole compromise thing. It's not for me.

    21. CW

      (laughs) I think if, uh, if your philosophical framework for this, your conceptual framework forms the foundation, there is a, a fair bit of weight on your shoulders, so you, uh ... All of the practice that you've had of forming these arguments and, and having these discussions going toe-to-toe with people hopefully will stand you in good stead as you move-

  12. 42:59 – 48:02

    Studying theology as an atheist at Oxford

    1. AS

      I hope so.

    2. CW

      ... as you move further forward. So I wanted to, uh, get onto your degree at Oxford.

    3. AS

      Mm-hmm.

    4. CW

      Um, you're doing philosophy and theology, is that correct? You've just finished-

    5. AS

      That's right, yeah.

    6. CW

      ... your first year?

    7. AS

      Yes.

    8. CW

      Um, what is it like studying theology as an atheist?

    9. AS

      ... it's, it's a, it's fun, you know. I- interesting, so at Oxford, at the very least, and I think in most, uh, theology faculties now, uh, certainly in this country, are not theology faculties, they've rebranded themselves into theology and religion faculties. So you can, you can tailor your approach, so you're not just studying theology, you're also studying religion as a concept and, um, for instance, the compulsory paper, one of the compulsory papers that all theology students have to do is the figure of Jesus through the centuries. That's a, a compulsory, um, a compulsory theology paper. But it's very broad and my tutor gave us a list of certain topics that we were gonna study, and I looked at the syllabus and said, "Hold on. Uh, we, we, we're doing this, this really boring, dry, mystic Russian thing in, in this week. But I've seen on the syllabus that you can, if you want to, do the novels of Dostoevsky. You can do Jesus in those novels." And I just said, "Can we do that instead?" And he goes, "Yeah, sure. Whatever." Like, uh, that might not be the same at other universities, but because of the tutorial system at Oxford, it's very ... You can, you can very much cater it to, to what you wanna do. So it's not like I have to sit around l- like, in, in churchy situations and learn about the nature of God. You have to do a bit of that, like, when we do Athanasius, who was one of the church fathers, we have to kind of engage with the debate as to whether, um, Jesus is fully man and fully God, or whether he's not fully man, or whether he's subordinate to the Father. But you can frame that not as, is Jesus subordinate to the Father? But, did Athanasius think he was subordinate to the Father, and why not? Like, what was his Biblical basis for that? You don't need to kind of actually think it's real. So you can study it from a very detached, secular perspective, which means that it's not like ironic or funny that an atheist studies theology, and I think at this point, probably more atheists are studying theology than religious people. And you find that when a religious person is studying theology, at least in my experience, a lot of the time they're very devout and they're doing it because they want to go into the priesthood or because they want to develop their theology, like, for their, for their personal benefit, um, whereas when an atheist studies it, they're doing it in a more kind of academic framework. Um, but again, that's fine because you can do both of those things. You can tailor it. You can do the reading you want to do, you can answer the questions you want to answer. So it's, it's actually not like ... You may as well ask what, what it's like to be a- an atheist studying history. It's like, yeah, there's a lot of religion in history, but i- i- it, it's the same as studying it for, for anybody else. I think the same thing is kind of happening with theology.

    10. CW

      Does it feel very voyeuristic in a way, the fact that you have this detachment from, from the, the, the belief and ... Obviously you had a, a fairly strong existing understanding of theology going into ... Uh, or at least based on your YouTube channel it seemed like you did. Um, were there any significant changes? You've just completed your first year. Have you found yourself looking at your worldview significantly differently in any areas after 12 months?

    11. AS

      Well, so, so far in, um, on the theology side of things ... On, on philosophy we had to do moral philosophy and general philosophy, which doesn't really touch religion, but that, like, the moral philosophy changed a lot what I think about moral philosophy. But with reference to, to theology, um, nothing much changed, but the papers weren't really about that. Like next year we're doing philosophy of religion, so the thing that I talk about on my channel mostly is arguments for the existence of God and things. I don't talk so much about the nature of scripture or, or about the prac- the pragmatism of, of certain religious traditions and things. That's not really my area. I'm more about the philosophy.

    12. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    13. AS

      Um, so if, if my views were gonna change on the things I talk about, it will probably happen next, next year.

    14. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    15. AS

      Uh, but y- you kind of ... I don't know. Let me think. It's ... I guess you, you realize it's much less unified than you thought. You realize that, um ... One of the things that really strikes me is that these people who are, who are heralded as, as philosophical giants in the theological history, people like, uh, Aquinas or Augustine or whatever, or Athanasius, uh, and you read their texts and, and you, you begin to kind of realize, this is just some guy. Right? This is just a, this is just a person writing stuff. Like, he might be pretty good at writing or whatever, but, but, like, it's just a person just, just writing something. Like, they're not ... They're, they're easy to engage with. You can engage with them in the same way that you can engage with a modern philosopher. Like, it's not this kind of untouchable, um, ancient wisdom. It's, it's just, it's just writing. It's just philosophical argumentation, it can be engaged with in the same way.

    16. CW

      Mm.

    17. AS

      But nothing, nothing's really changed on that front.

    18. CW

      Good.

    19. AS

      No, I don't think so.

    20. CW

      I think so. I had a, I, I asked for some questions, uh, from, uh, friends and, uh, some listeners to the channel, and one of them that came up was really, really good, so I wanted to, I wanted to put this one to you as a, a nice way to bookend this podcast.

    21. AS

      Mm-hmm.

  13. 48:02 – 54:58

    Secularism and moral virtue: grounding morality without God

    1. CW

      What do you think of the claim that an increase in secularism in recent history has resulted in a decrease in moral virtue?

    2. AS

      I don't think, I don't think that's true. I think implicit in the question might be i- if that's true, then, then if the question's being asked in a kind of challenging way, it would be like, "If you get rid of religion, then you get rid of moral virtue." Well, secularism isn't getting rid of religion, it's getting rid of religious influence over government. So-

    3. CW

      Mm. Okay. I think it's probably-

    4. AS

      ... it-

    5. CW

      ... probably related towards, uh, less religious following or people increasingly becoming nonreligious or areligious, I suppose.

    6. AS

      Yeah. Well, so, so those are two, those are two different questions. I think that if, if by getting rid of religion we're getting rid of kind of religious morality, then I think that's probably a good thing. Like, if you understand what religious morality often entails, then it's probably a good thing that we're getting rid of it. Um, I don't, I don't believe ... Like, if you meet an atheist, uh, I don't ... Uh, and, and this isn't just me talking, I think this is probably just an intui- just an intuition that most thinking people would have, you wouldn't assume that they're less moral.Now, you might assume that they have less of a grounding for it if you're somebody who believes ... if you're, like, a- an ethical subjectivist or you don't think morality can exist without God, you- you might think that, uh, they- they can't ground their morality. But if you speak to Christians who make the moral argument, they say, "If you're an atheist, you have no basis for morality." And people always criticize them and say ... and Hitchens uses it. He- he'd go, "How dare you say that we need moral permission to be good? How dare you say that we can't be moral without God?" It's, like, that's not what they're saying. They- they're saying that you are being moral, but that you have no grounding for it and that you're actually secretly kind of using the- the Christian worldview to- to buttress your moral views. Um, I don't think that's true. So when I make moral arguments, uh, I- I base them on, uh, I- I base them on secular principles, and I think that they hold up. Like, if you need religion to be moral, then let's investigate why that's the case. Like, why is it the case that if God says you have to do something, that becomes the moral thing to do? I mean, what is it about that? Uh, uh, y- why should you do what God pro- pl- pro- proclaims to be good? Like, is it because you want to avoid hell? Well, then it's just down to suffering again. Like, why should you want to avoid hell? What's wrong with going to hell? Well, it would, it would hurt. Okay. Like, then your argument is the same as mine. Do you think that God is just speaking ontological truths with his morality? Well, commands can't have truth value. You can't say, "Go over there. Is that true or false?" That's a command. That's not ... th- that can't be true or false. Like, the same problems that you get with trying to ground morality without God, you- you get the same problems trying to do it in God. Like, it- it's just a kind of different... i- it's a different ballgame, but the problems still arise. So I don't think it's true, and- and if it is the case that if you get rid of religion, uh, moral virtue declines, then that isn't a problem with atheism. That's probably just a problem with the way that atheism's being branded, and the only people who are really going there, going around convincing people that if you're an atheist you can get away with immorality, and that if you're an atheist you don't need to have moral virtue, and if you're an atheist you don't have to have moral principles, the only people who are, who are advocating that view are the religious.

    7. CW

      (laughs)

    8. AS

      So if it is the case that, that, uh, getting rid of religion is getting rid of morality, then that's because of the way that the religious have painted atheists' morality. If you speak to atheists, if we, if we allow atheists to speak about their morality and have discussions that are popular, uh, about grounding morality in a godless universe, then we wouldn't have that problem, because people would realize that we can ground morality just as easily, if not better, than, than we can ground, uh, religion. And if it does take a leap of faith, if it really is just- just a total, total bullshit to, uh, to try and ground morality without God, then my argument would be, then maybe it does take a bit of intellectual acrobatics or a bit of intellectual ignorance to- to base your morality in a godless universe. But it takes less intellectual acrobatics than it takes to convince yourself that a loving God exists, I think.

    9. CW

      I think s- certainly speaking to people about analogous topics, I don't understand... I'm a g- a good avatar for the layperson when it comes to these sorts of discussions, but it's almost tropey now and very cliché for people to have this sort of wistful days-gone-by view of when things were better and families-

    10. AS

      Yeah. Yeah, that's another, that's another thing, yeah.

    11. CW

      ... families stuck together and you had the support of the Church and you had this, that, and the other. I think that certainly seems to me to be a- an argument that is put forward for this, that there was- there was just more social cohesion and- and- and, um, the golden da- golden days of when people actually used to look out for each o- all of these kind of very wishy-washy, nebulous, tropey, ephemeral- ephemeral sort of claims-

    12. AS

      Yeah.

    13. CW

      ... and statuses that get used, that, I think, is what a lot of people think they're referring to.

    14. AS

      Yeah. And, look, I mean, that's- that's rose-tinted glasses. It wasn't all as good as you think it was, and if you were to be dropped back in that society, maybe it would be okay depending on who you are, but if you're a gay person, you'd probably have a pretty horrible time. Now, why is it that if you went back to this golden age of morality and social cohesion, that as a gay person you'd have a pretty bad time? Is it because of creeping secularism ruining your life, or is it because of religious tyranny saying that you're not allowed to love the person that you love?

    15. CW

      (laughs)

    16. AS

      I think that's probably the answer. Like, it- it's- it's- it's not... I mean, uh, uh, name a society that has been worsened by throwing off religious influence o- over government. Like, it- it can't be done. Like, the- the- all of the social progression that you can think of has- has coincided with secularism. Uh, every- every social progression has gone forward. Like, there's nothing that's gotten, there's nothing that's gotten- gotten worse i- in that- in that sense. Like, I- the... I: don't know. I mean, it- it really depends on what the person means specifically when they're- when they're- when they're answering- when they're asking the question, because if they do actually mean secularism, like on a governmental scale, well, moral virtue shouldn't derive from the government. Like, you shouldn't be being good because the government says so or because the Church says so. Moral virtue should be a private thing.

    17. CW

      Mm-hmm.

    18. AS

      You can... And- and secularism is... Just as it- just as a secular government, uh, will, uh, protect my right to be an atheist, it'll protect your right to be a Muslim or to be a Christian or to be a Jew. So if you think that morality does need to be grounded in- in Judaism or- or Islam or Christianity, then the best way that you can protect your religious freedom to express that religious morality is to live in a secular s- state that- that will not influence your church. Like, people think of secularism as the church not influencing the state. It's also the state not influencing the church. It's about a complete separation. So even if you do think, which I don't think is true, but even if you do think that you need m- uh, religion to be a good person, then the best way to protect your right to be religious is still to live in a secular society.

  14. 54:58 – 1:04:10

    Is atheism becoming ‘religious’? Community, first-mover advantage, and the meaning of religion

    1. CW

      I had a, uh, recently had Zuby on the podcast, who's a- a- a rapper and ac- actually an Oxford graduate, uh, from back in the day.

    2. AS

      Mm-hmm.

    3. CW

      A very, very interesting guy, and he's Christian. Given the sort of shows that he's on and the kind of, um, discussions that he has, that was a surprise to me, to hear someone who has those particular worldviews and was still Christian. That was surprising. One of the things that he brought up that I thought was incredibly interesting was he said that...... he feels like people who are atheists sometimes are more religious, they're more theocratic about their atheism, than some people who are religious are about their religion. And he said that he looks at the times that we're in now and sees people trying to find religion, he called it, in other things. So he said people try and find religion in a, a football team, their favorite football team. They're very religious about their football team or about their diet, about their-

    4. AS

      Mm-hmm.

    5. CW

      ... particular approach to a diet. And I wondered what your thoughts were on that particular module in humans for something that fills that block that religion was in or is in?

    6. AS

      Well if, if that's true then it's a criticism of religion. It just goes to show that religion has tried to monopolize the idea of social cohesion. People aren't striving for religion, they're not striving for some sky daddy to look after them when they're sleeping. They're looking for, for connection with their, with their fellow creatures. They're looking for, uh, comradery, they're looking for, uh, a way to get together and do something productive for the world. And some people believe that that's throwing yourself into a, into a football community and supporting a team. Some people, uh, believe that's by going vegan and trying to, to help the world. But like, it, it's got nothing to do with religion, and if you're someone who believes that that is religion, then you've been completely brainwashed into thinking that the only way, that, that, that as soon as somebody is trying to find a friendship and community and do good in the world, that they're being religious. Like, wha- what, what are you talking about? If, if that's what religion is, then practically anything you can do is religious, and any social activity becomes religious. And if, if everything is religious, then nothing is religious.

    7. CW

      (laughs)

    8. AS

      Um, like, to call that religion is to do what you probably criticize in so many new atheists, or, or new agey atheists, which are the people who go around and say, like, they call anything their religion. They say like, "Oh, I'm not religious, I'm, I'm like a spiritual person. I, I believe in the Earth and like I'm connected to the trees and things and that's my religion." It's like you're just totally watering down the meaning of religion. Um, like what's your definition of, of religion here? Uh, and a lot of people criticize, well it's not so much a criticism of religion, but a lot of anthropologists, uh, not so much anymore, but certainly traditionally speaking, a lot of anthropologists thought that religion grew out of this. Like, the Durkheimian view is, uh, of religion growing out of a, of a totally, i- i- it's a total social fact. It's, it's completely social in its origin and it comes from people kind of getting together and designating things as, as sacred and untouchable and separate from the rest of society, in the same way that people would do that at a football game or with a flag or something or nationalism.

    9. CW

      Mm.

    10. AS

      And the religious get very annoyed at that. They say, "Yeah, how could you possibly compare the two?" Like religion, religion comes from revelation. It comes from true facts about God. It doesn't come from some social progression or some, some made-up story like a flag does. Like it's a made-up concept that we've just all chosen to believe in. But if this person is saying that, that religion is essentially equatable with things like that, with things like nationalism, with things like football teams, then what does that say about religion? What's r- I thought religion was supposed to be based upon what's, what's true, not what's like socially cohesive. Uh, if you-

    11. CW

      Relig- did religion just get first mover advantage?

    12. AS

      How do you mean?

    13. CW

      So, you have this particular module, this particular-

    14. AS

      Mm-hmm.

    15. CW

      ... desire for people to have this social cohesion.

    16. AS

      Yeah.

    17. CW

      And religion, in the same way as the iPhone might not be the best touchscreen phone that's available, but it was the first one that got into most people's hands-

    18. AS

      Yeah, yeah.

    19. CW

      ... and now they're getting grandfathered in. Is that what religion did? Did it get first mover advantage into this particular structure?

    20. AS

      Well, it, it depends how you're defining religion. But I mean, yeah, i- it's like, uh, the, the earliest kind of forms of religion, the, the, the way that, uh, traditional, uh, anthropologists would try and understand a religion is by looking at primitive religions. They'd go right back to the beginning and find what is it that they all had in common before they got all super complicated with doctrines and dogma. What is the actual essence of religion? What makes a religion a religion? Uh, and no one could quite put their finger on it. Like no one really knows. Religion is a very difficult thing to define. Uh, but the, (laughs) I, I also, I don't see how that is necessarily a criticism of religion, like, o- of, of atheism. I, I don't have a problem or atheists don't have a problem with people, w- with people, uh, people arguing a case, or, or be, or trying to get the government to do good things. Like it's not, the problem isn't intrinsically trying to, to put your views into, into government action, or to try and proselytize your views. The problem is that we don't think those views are correct. Like if your views are correct, then of course you should be trying to, to influence the government. Of course you should be trying to, to convince other people and, and be shouting it in the streets and stuff like that. That's what I'm doing with veganism and that's the, and that's the criticism that will come. It's like, "Well, you're being religious about it." No, I'm not being religious about it.

    21. CW

      (laughs)

    22. AS

      I'm being steadfast about it. I think I'm correct and therefore I'm, I'm trying to argue that that's the case. And they're doing the same thing. It's like, I understand why you're doing that. Like if, if, if I thought that Christianity was true, I'd be doing everything (laughs) I could to make sure that my friends didn't burn in hell. I totally understand your position.

    23. CW

      Yeah.

    24. AS

      My problem isn't that you're, isn't that you're arguing your case, or that you're being proselytizing about it, or that you're, that you're being religious about it. My problem is I think you're wrong. That's all.

    25. CW

      (laughs) .

    26. AS

      Like, the, the, the idea that it, it, it's, there's some kind of problem with, with, uh, shouting your views from the rooftop. Like, no. If, if they're correct, then that's what you should be doing.

    27. CW

      (sniffs) It's interesting, that first mover advantage thing and what you're talking about there, that people now with a lot of things, uh, criticism as you've identified there, you're being religious about your veganism. It's that-

    28. AS

      Mm-hmm.

    29. CW

      ... that first mover advantage and the pervasiveness of religion as a, this meta existence, this, this thing which is the first thing of all of its kind of things, requires us to use everything in relation to that again. That it's just-

    30. AS

      Yeah.

  15. 1:04:10 – 1:05:27

    Closing: where to follow Alex (Cosmic Skeptic)

    1. CW

      You should get Zuby on the podcast. He's been invited out. He's flying out to L.A. this week. He's on Rogan, uh, next week. He's on, um, Dave Rubin show the week after that. Uh, but when he gets back, I'll, I'll link you two guys in an email. I think it'd be a really-

    2. AS

      Sure thing.

    3. CW

      It'd be a fascinating discussion. I'd love to see you guys go on. I think you'd really get on with him well. Um, but, Alex, today's been fantastic. Thank you so much for your time, man. Can you tell the listeners if they want to find out more, where should they head?

    4. AS

      Of course. Uh, so, Cosmic Skeptic is the name and it's quite specific, so pretty much anywhere slash Cosmic Skeptic. So, like, Instagram, Facebook, YouTube, all of that, if you just hit the forward slash Cosmic Skeptic, I've got all the URLs, so that's, uh, that's where to find me. But Twitter is probably the main place to keep up with what I'm doing.

    5. CW

      Fantastic. Alex, thank you so much for your time. Guys, if you've enjoyed this, make sure that you check Alex's YouTube channel out. It is fantastic. It's one of my favorites. As always, any comments, feedback that you have, feel free to get at me @ChrisWillX wherever you follow me. Like, share, subscribe, all that good stuff. But for now, Alex, thank you so much for your time.

    6. AS

      Of course.

    7. NA

      (music)

Episode duration: 1:05:27

Install uListen for AI-powered chat & search across the full episode — Get Full Transcript

Transcript of episode dcFCX6DNk5Q

Get more out of YouTube videos.

High quality summaries for YouTube videos. Accurate transcripts to search & find moments. Powered by ChatGPT & Claude AI.

iOSAndroidClaudeChrome