Alex O'Connor: Why You Feel Stuck in Life (#1 Question to Ask Yourself NOW)

Why do things exist? We have swallowed. wholesale this idea that everything can. be reduced to scientific explanations. I. just don't think that's true. >> What is the most dangerous idea people. believe without questioning? >> There are very few things that people. can be certain of. Pay attention when. you are convinced that you know why. you're doing something. >> What is a good life? >> I would ask what they mean by good. >> What do you think people are most afraid. to admit about life? >> That it comes to an end. Alex Okconor. Welcome to On Purpose.

>> Jay, nice to meet you. >> It's nice to meet you, mate. I've been. looking forward to meeting you for a. long, long time. I've been a consumer. and fan of your content. Thoroughly. enjoy watching you, whether it's debate, conversation. Uh, very, very intriguing. stuff. I wanted to start off by asking. you, I I hope you've never been asked. before. I don't think I saw this, but. uh, what's a childhood memory that you. have that you feel defines who you are. today? My childhood is a bit unusual. given the line of work I found myself. in. I grew up uh just sort of south of.

Oxford city center in a place called. Blackbird Lees. When I think of my. childhood, what I remember is like. acting up at school in secondary school. kind of not showing up for class. I used. to skateboard and I used to sort of wear. jeans and and the wrong shoes and have. arguments with the teachers like that. kind of petty stuff. I used to like. playing music, so I'd like skipped class. to be in the school recording studio, that kind of stuff. And you know, somebody asked me recently, I was doing. a talk with some some school kids. And. one of them asked like, "Do you think. your upbringing has affected your your.

worldview?" And that's a difficult. question to answer cuz we never know for. sure. Someone asks like, "Why are you an. atheist?" There's one sense in which you. could say, "Because I don't believe that. the contingency argument is sound." And. there's another in which you could say, "Because my parents got divorced when I. was eight." You know what I mean? And. those can kind of be both true. And so. it's difficult to sort of psychologize, but I was thinking like, yeah, maybe the. fact that I had this slightly sort of. acting out rebellious attitude that. meant that when I came across the new. atheist movement, something about the.

the debate, something about the theater. attracted me to it because I had that. kind of attitude as a child. Mhm. >> My memory would be kind of like walking. into school at like midday wearing the. wrong uniform and having somebody kind. of say, you know, you really should be. wearing black shoes and me just saying, "Oh, I'll sort it out tomorrow." And. that kind of just being the kind of. childhood I had, which is maybe not what. people would expect given how much I I. care about being a bit more like. studious these days and how I'm kind of.

associated uh with like academics. I'm. not an academic myself, but I speak to. them all the time and I've got a. university degree and this kind of. stuff. I find that's also kind of like. helpful for people to hear sometimes. because a lot of people listen to my. stuff who are really interested in like. philosophy or theology or whatever it. is, but they they don't like school. They don't do so well at school and not. interested. And I kind of want to say. that that's that's okay. Like don't. flunk out. like do the best you can but. don't take school or your your sort of.

desire to be in school or academia as a. proxy for your desire to like learn. about the world you know. >> so it sounds like there was a bit of a. rebellious. anti-establishment pushing back version. of you but maybe not. >> everyone likes to say that right. everyone likes to sort of be well I was. such a I was a rebellious child and I. used to sort of win debates with my. teachers so like yeah but you know. nothing super profound just like your. normal kind of slightly annoying. >> kid in school. >> but you were still great at school. because you went to Oxford as well. So. you would have got good grades. >> eventually. Right. The first time I did.

what we call A levels in in the UK, which is like the last two years of high. school, I did further maths, maths, and. physics. >> Yeah, those are all hard subjects. >> And I did critical thinking as a side. sort of thing. And I got three U's, which is like if you go like ABCD E, F, U stands for unlocked. It means it's so. low that it doesn't even register. I. actually overslept one of the exams and. I got a phone call from my mom um sort. of waking me up being like are you like. I just had a call from the school and. the disappointment in a it was.

horrifying you know but I just I just. didn't care. It was really only in like. the last year I had to go back and redo. A levels because you have to stay in. education till you're 18 in the UK and I. thought you know what why not let's give. this a crack. So I got ABC doing. humanities subjects. I remember I had. some friends who still have these. friends who wanted to go to Oxford for. the longest time, you know, since they. were young and they worked really hard. at school and I would sometimes joke, you know, about how I was going to go to. Oxford, too. And then they would laugh. and I'm like, okay, I am joking, but why.

is that so funny? Why is that so funny? You know, and I kind of I got a bit. motivated by these these friends of. mine. Seeing that like ambition and. drive. >> kind of helps me and becoming their. friends was just a good influence in. that in that very crucial period of like. sort of motivating me to to get the. grades which allowed me to go to to. Oxford. But then again like you know if. you're if you're flunking out school. right now, if you're doing your exams. and you think it's like the end of the. world, retake these exams. It's not the. end of the world. And if you don't get. into your dream university, there are. all kinds of reasons why I might have. preferred to have gone to a different. university. It's just like nice to know.

that there are options. I think young. people everything's so serious when it. comes to like exams and they are you. know take them seriously. It's better if. you do well sure but it's not the end of. the world if you don't. >> Yeah. And you can take them again. >> Yeah. Exactly. >> Talk to me about that flipping mindset. though because getting a you not turning. up to an exam and then turning it around. and being able to go this is important. Talk to me about that shift though. because I think at that age we do place. such a heavy weight on these things. not. showing up, not turning up, failing,

feeling like it's not working out, but. then being able to flip it around within. a short period of time. >> It was such a long time ago and you. can't fully say this is exactly what I. was doing, but talk to me about at least. what it feels like when you reflect back. and go why you felt I'm going to change. my mindset around this. I think it was. because I knew that I could do more. I. knew that I could pass the exam. I knew. that I could do philosophy and critical. thinking and this kind of stuff. Just. sort of flunking out of school in that.

way. For me, it was a very intentional. thing. I'm not interested in this. I. want to be a rockstar or a professional. skateboarder or something like that. instead. But I kind of got the feeling. that people like didn't believe me. You. know, they thought that the reason why. I'm failing is because I I'm not, you. know, I don't have the goods. I can't do. this kind of stuff. And it wasn't just. that. It wasn't like I just thought I. need to prove a point now. But when I. suddenly got this idea in my head that. it would be fun to go to university, it. would be cool. And I started admiring. new atheist figures like Richard Dawkins. and Christopher Hitchens, both of whom.

studied at Oxford and I'd also started. making YouTube videos. This was the. other thing, right? I'm like 17 when I. start making videos online, at least the. videos I make today. And they were these. kind of edgy new atheist type videos. And like they started doing quite well. relative for the time. And I think there. was also this feeling of like if I'm. going to be on the internet talking. about, you know, God and religion and. debating people and stuff, I better. prove that I know what I'm talking. about. It feels a bit weird to be doing. that. >> and then like failing school.

>> Um and so I kind of knew that I could do. it. I thought that it might be useful. And so I just sort of decided to give it. another go. >> And it was very much a case of being. like, yeah, see I can I can do this. I. just didn't want to before. And I kind. of regret that I didn't. But then having. said that, if I'd have done further. maths and physics, who knows what I'd be. doing now and I'd still be interested in. philosophy. But I think that it was. definitely a good thing that it went the. other way. >> Yeah, I appreciate you addressing some. things about how young people are. feeling today about college or not going.

or university or whether attending. When. you think about it from that. perspective, you said you knew you had. the goods. I think a lot of young people. today feel they don't have the goods. they they don't actually feel confident. in their ability academically, at. school, or even otherwise. What do you. say to them? What do you think about for. someone who's looking at that going, "Yeah, I don't I don't even know what I. would do. I don't know what I'd study. I. don't really know myself." You got. interested in atheism early. You were. making content. You were almost this you.

were this selfarter, it seems, 10 years. ago, which again was pretty. revolutionary for someone your age. because there's not that many people. that got started that early. What would. you say to someone right now who's. saying, "Alex, you know, I'd love to do. something like you or my own thing, but. I actually don't know what I'm good at. I don't don't know what my strengths. are.". >> I think it's really rare to know what. you want to do at any age. Essentially, a lot of people fall into what they do, >> but certainly at that age. And I think. that. >> you kind of have to either take a guess. and realize that you can always change.

your mind or you can do it later. You're. going to be good at something. there's. going to be something you're good at and. it might be something which isn't. traditionally recognized as a form of. intelligence. I mean intelligence is a. difficult thing to define but it's. probably something like the ability to. perform particular tasks. It's ability. to like perform tasks with a particular. goal in mind. That's why we call AI. artificial intelligence even though it. might not be conscious or a person or. anything. The intelligence is the. ability to perform tasks and there's. something you can do. People who are. musically talented it's a very.

particular kind of of genius. They might. have absolutely no idea what the. quadratic equation is, but they can just. intuitit musical feeling in a way that. other people just couldn't even. comprehend. There might be skills that. you didn't even know were skills. Maybe. you're like really good at architecture. and your school just doesn't do and it. would take a long time for you to. realize that that's the thing you you're. into. It took me a long time to realize. architecture was even like a subject. that existed that people studied. You. know what I mean? >> Yeah, I love that point. >> There's going to be something you're. good at. And if if you're being told.

that you're not good at something, it. may be that you're not putting enough. effort in and that you're slacking, in. which case, try a bit harder. But if you. feel like you are, you're doing your. best, you're trying as hard as you can, and people keep telling you you need to. try harder, it's probably just that. they're not recognizing the things that. you're good at. But we have no idea why. some people are good at things and. others not. It could be social, it could. be genetic, it could be anything. Who. knows? All that matters right now, you're good at some things and bad at. others. I think the best advice anyone. can give on that regard in that regard.

is to figure out as quickly as possible. what you're good at. That's the most. important thing. What are you good at. and what do you enjoy doing and try to. try to pursue that and then realize that. you don't have to. Look, you don't have. to go to university. Even if you want to. be a physicist or a mathematician, eventually you'll probably have to, but. you don't have to do it now. You can. take some time out. You can think, is. this really what I want to be doing? You. can go and travel the world or whatnot. If you really want to go down the. academic route, it's there are always. options available for you. And there are. so many now. You can do them online. You. can do them virtually. You can do them.

part-time. There's always something. available for you. It's so obvious to. someone who's an adult, someone who's. like currently working in a cafe and. doesn't really like know what they want. to do with themselves. >> It's not going to console them to say, "Hey man, you don't need to worry about. academia. I didn't even think of that.". But when you're a kid, academia is like. the only thing. >> Unless maybe you're like a particularly. talented like footballer or music school. and then maybe and but even then maybe. your school doesn't encourage that kind. of thing. And you will be told that the. most important thing in your life are. your exams. Don't get me wrong, those. exams are important. Like, nail them. It.

will help you in the long run. But the. idea that that is kind of what life's. about is obviously insane. And I think. kids like know that, but they haven't. like felt it. They haven't internalized. it. I speak to a lot of school kids and. they've heard this kind of stuff. You. know, don't let the exams rule your life. and stuff. Some of them I think hearing. that I literally did just completely. fail and then change my mind and turn it. around and it sort of relaxes them a. little bit. There's no guarantee that. you're going to be able to turn it. around and then go to Oxford, right?

It's obviously not the case. I feel very. lucky in that regard, but like there are. options, man. >> I love the idea that you only discover. subjects exist after you become an. adult. I felt like that with so many. things. I thought I hated science. because it was biology and then learned. about neuroscience later on and I was. fascinated. >> Exactly. >> And I thought, oh gosh, if I didn't have. to learn plant biology, if I it was. always brain biology, I think I would. have been that would have been something. I would have wanted to study. And you. can now. That's the point, right? You. can textiles. Yeah. But I think you can. you can get the the kernel of of what.

you might be into because maybe you. might find that you really enjoy your. art classes. >> and you know you don't want to be an. artist. you know, you're not going to be. the next, you know, Monet or whatever, but like you enjoy it. That should be. enough to maybe think, okay, then I'll. study that. And I don't know where it's. going to end up, but that's the kind of. thing that opens up these worlds that. you didn't know existed. That will help. with being able to be an architect. >> Yes. >> Cuz you will be able to draw images. It. will help with doing textiles. It will. help with set management. You know, you. could be someone who designs sets for. podcasts, a job that didn't even exist. really when I was at school. And now.

it's a very specific, very niche thing. that people are after. The most. important thing is the passion. It would. always really upset me when at a. university there were people who would. struggle a lot with the work and then. also think and I'm not even sure if I. should be doing this. >> I don't know if this was the right. subject. That's just that's nihilism, man. Suffering is one thing. Being aware. that your suffering is kind of. meaningless. That's what nihilism is. And that's what can can be brought out. if you study something you're not. passionate about and then it gets hard. >> because you've got this double whammy of.

the meaninglessness plus the difficulty. >> But so many of us are stuck exactly. there. You know, if someone studies. theology or philosophy, it's famously a. very unemployable job. What are you. going to do except be a priest or a. YouTuber? I can deal with the fact that like, what's this all for? Is this going. anywhere? Is this going to get me a job? Because I've got this passion for it cuz. I just love it for its own sake. Maybe. you're studying to be a doctor. You're. doing medicine. And maybe you're not. super passionate about it. A lot of. people are, but maybe you're not. But. you think to yourself, well, I know. where this is going. I'm going to be a.

doctor. I'm going to save lives. I'm. going to make a lot of money. I'm going. to provide for my children. And that. allows you to deal with the fact that. you're not passionate about it. >> You need at least one of those. You need. the passion or the direction. If you. have both, then you've hit the gold. mine. If you have neither, then I think. you become a bit nihilistic, at least in. regards to your to your employment. >> Absolutely. I've I've heard you say, Alex, that you're fascinated by history. >> Oh, yeah. >> And and I wanted to ask you, if you. could go back in time and witness. something personally, what moment in. history would you choose and why? I'm.

afraid it's going to be boring in the. sense that it is definitely going to be. something biblical. Like there's no. question about that. No question. >> Any anytime. >> there are certain things which it might. be sort of interesting to see. I'd love. to see Stonehenge getting built. I'd. love to see the pyramids be built. That. kind of stuff. But when I came back and. said, you know, turns out they used a. pulley system and everyone goes like, "Oh, cool." It's not the most profound. thing in the world. Um for me, my line. of work is so much engaged in worldview. And the worldview that I'm mostly. engaged in talking about is. Christianity. And some of the biggest.

mysteries about the Christian religion. are about specifically the kinds of. things that Jesus actually said and did. as opposed to what Orthodox Christians. believe he did. The resurrection is an. obvious example. Stand outside the tomb. of Joseph of Arythea and see if somebody. gets up and walks out. But also the. baptism. I'd love to see the baptism of. Jesus because I want to know why was. Jesus being baptized? Who was John the. Baptist? Why did Jesus seem to be some. kind I mean historically some people. think he might have been a disciple of. John the Baptist which Christians won't.

want to accept but I'd love to know that. fact. It's the moment where Jesus's. ministry really begins and the gospels. tell us that the heavens open and. there's this voice from heaven and that. um this is where Jesus sort of picks up. some of his initial disciples from as. well. I would love to see what happened. there because if I showed up and John. the Baptist said, "Behold the lamb of. God who takes away the sins of the. world." And I would say, "Gosh, okay, Christianity's maybe got something going. for it." But if he showed up and Jesus. bowed down and said, "Master," you know,

then I think it would totally upset. Orthodox Christianity. And I think. that's like a really important question. What's the relationship between Jesus. and John the Baptist? So, I'd love to. see them meet, >> but it's it's hard to know. I mean, you've surely got an answer to this. question yourself. >> Sometimes I find myself being fascinated. by so many moments in history and mainly. it's about human decision-m. So, I I. don't know if you saw this movie. recently. It's called Nuremberg. >> I haven't seen it. >> It's all about the Nuremberg trials and. post World War II, how we make decisions.

on morality, how we make decisions on. how we. evaluate what the Germans did. And you. got Gurring who was leading the Germans. on behalf of Hitler versus his therapist. played by Ramy Malik who who's. unbelievable in the movie. But I look at. a moment like that and I go wow. Like. humans had to really sit down and think. about because for the first time ever. how do you truly go to court for post. World War II and the actions that were. taken against the Jews. And I'm like.

that's a fascinating moment to be a part. of now that's not that long ago. So then. you were moments in history. >> where big decisions were made by groups. of human beings after groups of human. beings went through certain amount of. suffering, turmoil or subjugation and. when you don't have documents. I mean, cuz when history is recent enough, you. can kind of put yourself there by. reading the books. And obviously there. there's going to be bias and. misreporting and stuff like that, and. you've got to be careful. But like, if. you go far back enough, especially into.

ancient history, you've got like one. little shred. Some of our most. well-known, famous historical figures. from antiquity, we only know they exist. from like maybe one, maybe two sources. It's like a scrap of papyrus somewhere. with a name scribbled on it. And yet, these people were were so important. So. I think it would have to be it would. have to be an ancient. >> Yes. Yes. Yeah. I I go back I would. genuinely want to go back to the point. at which the Bhagat Gita was spoken. which has always been my fascination and. my form of study but being at that mo I.

wouldn't want to be on the battlefield. cuz I couldn't handle myself. I'll tell. you that I'd fail miserably at archery. or anything like that. >> Do you think if you went back you would. find Arjuna on a literal battlefield. being advised by by an actual deity? >> I would hope so. I mean the place. Kuruketra exists. It's believed that. that is where the battle took place. And. so to me I would hope I would definitely. hope so that I would get to experience. it as it's told in in the way it's told. as a historic piece. If you went back. and you found there were no such.

historical event or maybe there were a. historical battle but like the. conversation. that's had throughout the bag of agita. is a fictional one. Would that like. trouble you? Because for me I'd still. quite like the bag of agita. I'd find it. worth reading. >> I think I'd find the text still. fascinating. I I think you'd you'd feel. slightly misled in the fact that you. were told it was historical. >> Sure. >> So, I think I wouldn't have an issue. with what's in the book and the. conversation because I find great value. in meaning in that, but I would feel.

misled that I'd been told this was. historic and it wasn't actually. historic. It's so important like what. the claim is that's being made by. particular religious traditions. For. example, for many Christians, if it. turns out that the resurrection of Jesus. is not a literal event that happened in. history, but instead some kind of later. mythologizing, the religion falls apart. It grounds itself on a on a very. specific historical claim. It can't just. be, oh, I'm a bit annoyed that my my. pastor told me that this really. happened, but I guess this is fine. It.

would be like, this has completely. upended everything that I believe about. the universe. That's one of the reasons. why when you ask what historical event. would I see. >> the key moment in the world's most. popular religion. seems to be quite an important one to. me. Suppose you went and found out that. you know Jesus didn't rise from the dead. or you found out that Muhammad was a. false prophet. What are you going to do? Like come back to London and go right. here ye here ye um I've got to tell you. guys something. You'd be terrifi I'd. rather not know because I' I'd be. terrified to to let people know what I'd. seen. >> Yeah. And no one would believe you. anyway. >> Exactly. Or there would be you you'd.

start developing a following on YouTube. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah, you'd you'd be. able to create your own cult. Talk to me. about what reading you have done in. Eastern traditions. It sounds like you. have done a bit of exploration that I. probably haven't heard about before. >> Basically, it's really funny because I I. talk about religion all the time and. particularly Christianity. People say. things like, "Hey, man, you should talk. about you should talk about Hinduism.". And I'm like, "Okay, I I get why you're. saying that. That's fair. I'd love to.". But it's not quite as simple as that. >> Of course not. You know what I mean?

It's a it's a really. >> even when it comes to like people say. well you should you should have you. should have a Hindu on your show to talk. to them and I'm like even that is tricky. because firstly I prepare as hard as I. can for every guest that comes on my. show. >> Mhm. >> I can't learn Hinduism and even so it's. not like you can just have a Hindu on. the show and that become like oh you've. done you've done Hinduism now. It took. me a long time like even sort of finding. my feet as to like where to start. looking for for interesting stuff and my.

way in ultimately came through my study. of consciousness. I'm fascinated by the. philosophy of mind and of course the. Indian tradition has this amazing. content essentially on the philosophy of. mind that I hadn't really encountered. before. Becoming convinced of some weird. views about consciousness about how it's. not reducible to material and how it's. not as simple saying that brains just. produce consciousness that kind of stuff. sort of led me into learning about. specifically the advite vidanta. tradition. advice of vidanta meaning.

like the vades are part of the the Hindu. scriptural cannon. They're like the. oldest religious scriptures in the. world. I think like ant means I think. it's the the the addendum anter means. like end. So you get like end of the. vadas meaning like the latter part of. the vadas which collectively are known. as the aanishad and advita meaning like. a like non and viter meaning jewel. So. in the philosophy of mind, if I think in. philosophy generally, one of the biggest. questions is how many types of stuff are.

there? Because there's this really weird. sort of division of reality where we're. conscious, we have subjectivity, like. inner thoughts, and this mug over here. doesn't. So there seems to be kind of. two different kinds of things. You. basically got three options when it. comes to explaining that. One is that. there are just two types of things in. the universe. There's mind and there's. body. There's mental and there's. physical. and they are just separate. kinds of things and somehow they. interact with each other. Another way is. to say actually there's only one type of.

stuff and that type of stuff is the dead. stuff. It's the the matter, the atoms. This is the most popular view in the. west today. The only stuff that exists. is atoms that are dead and it's just. that if you put them together in the. right way, you get this thing called. consciousness. But really, it's kind of. just a manifestation of the atoms. There's a third option which is there is. only one type of stuff and it's the. mental stuff and what we call physical. what we call the physical world around. us is a manifestation of mental stuff. which sounds super hippie- dippy but. that's only because we're not used to. it. I mean the idea that I people think.

that you know they're just happy to. accept that if you put physical matter. together in the right order it will. produce thoughts. That is as weird to me. as saying that if you put thoughts. together in the right order, you could. produce some physical matter. It seems. like a sort of category mistake, right? But I think there's only one type of. stuff. So there's this view which in the. western tradition is called idealism, which is kind of the view that. everything exists as mental stuff. Some.

people have said that everything is kind. of an idea in the mind of God. Some. people think that nothing exists except. in so far as it's being perceived. It's. a very sort of complicated and quite. deep philosophical tradition, but it's. something that the advite of vidanta. tradition had been banging on about for. thousands of years prior to its. development in the western cannon. The. reason it's vidanta is because the. apananishads are like particularly. interested in the idea that kind of.

division is a is a is an illusion and. unity is real and it heavily implies. that consciousness or like the soul the. kind of stuff that makes you yourself is. kind of one thing with everybody else's. self and that all of that consciousness. is kind of the same thing as the. universe that there's this great big. sort of unity of of stuff. I thought. that was really cool. So it's a bit of a. sort of long-winded way to say that I. started looking into that and then I I. had Swami Sava Priyanander he's the head. of the Vidanta society of New York or.

whatever it's called on my show and we. talked about Advide Fidanta. We talked. about consciousness. We didn't talk. about the Hindu pantheon of gods. I. still don't understand how Brahmanifests. in like hundreds of different deities. I. I still don't really get that at all. I. don't know about the different. traditions who see different deities as. their main gods and stuff like that. I. don't really understand that. But I. understand the philosophy of. consciousness. We were able to have a. great conversation about this particular. Indian tradition. But the thing about. avidanta is it's not really a religious. tradition. It's a philosophical. tradition that comes from India. So when.

I do this show, yeah, I'm speaking to a. Hindu and people say, great, you're. talking about Hinduism for the first. time. It's like, no, I'm not really. I'm. talking about a philosophical school. that comes from India. >> Yeah. >> Which is not the same thing. I mean, the. word Hindu is very unhelpful anyway. because it's it's it's what's called an. exon, which is a word which is applied. from the outside. People didn't call. themselves Hindus. It's sort of got. ethmological roots with like the Indis. River Valley which is where a particular. people were just doing their thing just. going about their business and Europeans.

sort of label these people Hindus but it. sort of refers to the geography someone. saying like have a Hindu it's it's kind. of a little bit like someone saying like. have a European on. So I I can get why. somebody if you'd never spoken to a. European would want me to speak to a. European because there is a different. flavor of of thought that goes on there. but it's it's such a rich and varied. sort of culture. >> No, I appreciate the way you're looking. at it. >> You can't do that. So when someone says. like like you ask, you know, >> what's your engagement with the Indian. tradition? >> It's sort of like somebody saying what's. your engagement in the western.

philosophical cannon? It's like that's a. big question. I've got to say I'm much. more specific. You know, I'm interested. in this person or that person or this. school. And so for me the stuff that I. love from the Indian tradition is is. their views on consciousness which I. think predates the the western stuff and. does it a lot more sort of intuitively. Big news. Juny just launched at Kroger. and we're celebrating with a free can. for you because most of us hit that. point in the afternoon when our energy. dips and the focus starts to fade. Well, that's exactly why we created Juni. A.

sparkling drink crafted with natural. ingredients to lift your mood, sharpen. your focus, and give you smooth energy, all without the crash. Now available at. Kroger stores, including Ralph's, FredMyer, King Supers, Smiths, and. Fries, where you can grab a free Juny on. us. So head to drinkjuny.com/kroger. to claim your free can in store so you. can feel better and live better. Are. there a lot of new age atheists that are. also fascinated in that way? Is that. common or is that quite rare?

>> I I don't think new atheists because the. new atheist movement was was a very It's. interesting how we talk about it in the. past tense now like it doesn't really. exist anymore. >> It was a a very sort of prickly kind of. criticism and it's indebted to the. so-called four horsemen mostly Richard. Dawkins Christopher Hitchens and Sam. Harris. Daniel Dennett wasn't quite as. fierce, you know, but these guys, you've got a a biologist, an. evolutionary biologist and Richard.

Dawkins, a journalist in Christopher. Hitchens, a neuroscientist, although I. don't know if he did anything further. than his like studies, Sam Harris, and. then you've got the philosopher Daniel. Dennett. And notice that the philosopher. is the one who's like the least, [laughter] you know, critical in that. regard and outgoing, although he had a. lot to say about religion. The reason. why these guys in other disciplines were. getting involved is because like Richard. Dawkins was annoyed that young earth. creationists were saying you can't teach. evolution in schools. Christopher. Hitchens was getting annoyed that.

religious justifications were being used. for geopolitical terrorism. That was. their kind of line of attack. And so to. think that they would be talking about. that kind of stuff that Hitchens would. be sort of standing up and complaining. about the sort of the messianic. undertones of the Israeli Palestine. conflict and then suddenly start going. but you know I think that Brahman and. Atman are maybe the same thing but I. want to critique that idea by you know. appealing to the rival school. It just. seems ridiculous to me. So, so I think. new atheism, no, but that's because.

within eastern religions you have the. same kind of conflicts going on which I. don't think the west knows as much. about. But also the kind of engagement I. have is not about that. Like I say, I'm. not interested so much in the in the. deities and the gods and the sex. I'm. interested in the philosophical. traditions and I don't think the new. atheists were even interested in the. western philosophical traditions. They. were interested in the the practical. reality of religion. Religion is a force. for evil. Religion causes wars and that. kind of stuff. That's all very well and. good, but to me, I've always compared.

that to saying like it's like saying. politics is bad. >> Yes, >> sure. You know, politics causes wars and. politics drives families. It's like. that's true, but that doesn't mean we. should be an anarchist. >> Mhm. >> Maybe we should, but it doesn't. guarantee. It doesn't mean there isn't a. correct political position. And. critiquing that kind of stuff doesn't. mean that you know anything about. political philosophy. you might not know. anything about, you know, theories of. justification of the state or whatever. it is that political philosophers sit.

around talking about, you know, and I. think the same thing's going on with new. atheism. They couldn't recite Thomas. Aquinus's causal arguments for God if. you paid them to. Richard Dawkins does. so in the God delusion. He he sort of. responds to Thomas Aquinus directly. Thomas Aquinus is the most celebrated. Christian metaphysician like in history. And he responds to Thomas Aquinus in. about two pages. It takes more than two. pages even to explain the terminology. that Thomas Aquinus is using, let alone. to list, explain, and then debunk. I. think we have some evidence that there's.

just not this engagement with the. philosophical tradition. I don't mean to. insult these people. I like Richard. Richard is a friend of mine. I think he. knows that I disagree with his. philosophical musings. And he himself. just admits he says that he's just not. interested in theology and philosophy. It's just not what he wants to do. He. wants to do science. I think fair. enough. But then maybe don't write a. book with a chapter called why there. almost certainly is no god. But he did. it because he cared about science. He. doesn't care about the calam. cosmological argument or whatever. He. cares about evolution being taught in.

schools and that kind of stuff. And so. the idea that that someone who cares. about that and that's their way in is. suddenly going to become interested in. the even in philosophy in the west is. not very popular. The idea that these. guys are going to engage with that I. think is is untrue. And so that funnels. down to the modern day the sort of. teenage atheists like me on YouTube. making videos took me years before I. even encountered Indian philosophy and. that only came after I sort of calmed. down a bit. Everyone's almost arguing.

something from their very. I don't maybe it narrows the wrong word. but everyone's looking at something. through their lens and of course. preaching or sharing whatever that may. be whether you're religious or whether. you're an atheist or or whether you're. agnostic and it applies to everything in. the same way as you could talk about. entrepreneurship and someone could say. hey if you don't know how to sell then. you can't be an entrepreneur and then. someone else is over there going if you. don't know how to negotiate you don't. know how to be an entrepreneur it's. almost impossible to get a 360°ree view. on a belief an idea because there's so.

many different thoughts and ideas. How. would you explain your world view to a. 10-year-old so that they simply. understood it? I would probably wait. until this this child was taking an. interest in such things and I might ask. them I mean it might be a bit young 10. to start talking about consciousness but. at some point I might sort of say don't. you think it's weird that. you are conscious you have thoughts and. feelings you have an inner sense of self. I'd use different words cuz they're 10. and this mug and this table and this.

chair don't and depending on what they'd. say you'd ask a further question so if. they say yeah no that I guess so but. that's because you know you've got a. brain and then you might start asking. about what they think the brain is and. how so you sort of ask questions. >> and in my view I think we have just sort. of swallowed wholesale this idea that. everything can be reduced to scientific. explanation at least everything that is. true about the universe can be. scientifically explained and I just.

don't think that's true and I think it's. like trivially untrue I'm not making. some profound what about love man you. can't scientifically It's like, "No, you. can explain the chemicals that are. firing." I mean something a bit more. specific, which is that science isn't. really in the business of explaining. things. I'm no longer talking to the. 10-year-old, by the way. Science is not. in the business of explaining things. It's in the business of describing. things mathematically. Galileo famously. says that mathematics is the language of. the universe. Fair enough. But maths on. its own doesn't do anything. Maths just.

describes. All mathematical equations. have an equal sign and it describes some. sort of fact about reality. It doesn't. cause anything. Newton's laws of motion. don't cause objects to move. They. describe how objects move when they're. in motion. Similarly, the example I love. to give because it's so explicit is. Newton's discover discovery of gravity. What did Newton actually discover when. he discovered gravity? What's the thing. that he actually figured out? We had. known for a very long time that objects.

fall to the ground, right? What's the. thing that he realized? Well, Newton. asked an interesting question. He looks. up at the moon and he asks like like why. isn't the moon falling towards the. earth? And his sort of profound realization is. that the moon is falling towards the. earth all the time. It's just that if if. something falls towards my hand, it will. hit my hand. But if I knock it to the. side a little bit, then it will kind of. do this. It will kind of miss the earth. a bit and then crash into the side. If I. knock it a little bit further to the. side, it will it will sort of miss it.

even more and maybe crash into the. bottom eventually. And if you knock it. just the right speed to the side, it. will keep falling towards the Earth, but. keep missing it. And that's what we call. orbit. And Newton realized that the same. thing that makes objects fall to the. ground keeps the planets in circulation, which is a profound realization. And. then he took to the task of. mathematically describing it. Calculus, inverse square law. So he figures out. that the distance between two things if. you square that distance that is how.

much weaker the force of gravity is. So. something is two times further away it's. four times less attractive and he does. all of this and it's brilliant in the. prinia mathematica but then there. remains this question like why not how. do objects fall to the ground not what. mathematical rules do they sort of do it. by but why do they fall to the ground. and in the scolium which is like an. addendum to the prinia mathematica where. Newton published these findings he. answers this explicitly you can read. this online he says like as to what. gravity actually is as to why this stuff.

is happening. He writes hypothesis. nonfingo. It's in Latin. It means I. frame no hypothesis. He doesn't know. And he says it's also not the kind of. question that science should be engaged. in. >> because it can't answer that kind of. question. In other words, Newton has. described brilliantly. planets, orbits, objects falling to the. ground, this force which he calls. gravity. And he just it's sort of a. placeholder. Like the word gravity is. just a word for whatever is the thing.

that's making this happen, but he. doesn't know what's making it happen. And it's so funny to me when people like. look into the past and they say how. silly are the beliefs that people used. to have. They used to believe in like. animism. They used to believe in. spirits. They used to believe that, you. know, angels were pushing around planets. and stuff. But no, no, no. Since the. scientific revolution, we're much more. intelligent because we explain things in. terms of. forces. forces. Like, think about that word for.

a minute. You know what I mean? Like, we're so used to hearing it, >> but that's it. And if you ask a. scientist what a force is, >> Yeah. >> they'll either have to tell you that a. force is just a a mathematical. description of regularities that we've. observed. [laughter]. >> Mhm. >> Or they'll have to say unjustifiably, well, it's the thing that makes things. fall to the ground. But what is it? You. don't know that. You don't know why. that's happening. Now, to be clear, some. people will say, okay, fair enough with. Newton. I pick Newton because he says it. explicitly. This isn't an insult to. science. It's not it's not insulting to. say that it's not really interested in.

the why question. It's interested in the. how question. Some people think the why. question just shouldn't exist. That's. fine to say. But science itself is. definitely in the business of. describing. Scientists will happily tell. you that anything which is you know true. about physics can be described. mathematically. But if you think about. what maths is, it's equations. They. don't do anything. Steven Hawking at the. end of a brief history of time quite. famously, I wish I could recite it from. memory. It's so beautiful. He he writes. about how he hopes that maybe one day. our basic scientific theories will. condense into one great big theory of.

everything. That there'll be one. beautiful equation that sort of governs. everything about the universe. But he. says we'll still be left with the. question of what breathes fire into the. equations. Equations don't make things move. >> They describe how things move when. they're in motion. Right? So we're left. with this great big explanatory gap. If. people are in any doubt about this, there's a wonderful clip of Richard. Fineman. There's a BBC interviewer. asking him about magnets. He says, "You. know, when I push two magnets together, they repel each other. What what what's. going on there?" And Fman's like, "Well,

the, you know, the magnets are repelling. each other." And he goes, "Yeah, no, I. but you know what's um what's what's. happening there?" And Fman's like, "What. what do you mean what's happening. there?" And there's a sort of moment of. confusion. And the interviewer says, "I. I've got to say, I think this is a. reasonable question." And Bman goes, "Oh, no. It's a very reasonable. question, but what do you mean?" Because. if you ask a question like why? Well, depends on your level of explanation. Like, why is Aunt Marie in the hospital? Well, because she slipped and fell on. the ice. For most people, that would. satisfy. But if you were like an alien.

who didn't know anything, you'd need to. know why slipping on ice sends you to a. hospital. >> Mhm. >> So, you'd have to explain that. And then. you'd have to explain like why is ice. slippery? Well, because when you step on. ice, it evaporates the the top level, which turns into water. Notice we're. just describing what's happening. Okay. But so, why does that happen? Well, now. we're talking about the molecular. composition of water and its and its um. sort of chemical interactions. But why. why does that happen? Fman's just. basically pointing out that if you ask. the why question, you are sent into this. regress down into the most fundamental.

questions of reality. And in fact, Fman. then says, and if you want to know why. Marie fell over, you'd have to know. about gravity. Why does gravity work? And that's where we just were a second. ago, right? This thing gravity, which. science will describe but never like. explain why it's why it's occurring. And. fineman sort of comes back to magnets. and says so so for now you know it it. will have to be enough just to say that. they are repelling each other and that's. that's fair enough but I think that's. what's going on. >> Yeah. >> Science describes like physics is the. description of and the theory of.

physical matter and its relations. It. therefore presupposes the existence of. matter and its relations. One of the. foundational questions I don't think. science will answer is where that. physical matter came from. Like it seems. plausible. We say look at the progress. we've made. We used to think that we. couldn't explain biological complexity. but now we have. We used to think that. we couldn't explain why objects fall but. now we have. I want to point out that. firstly what we've actually done is. describe those processes. But also I. think there's a categorical difference.

between explaining some kind of physical. interaction at a deeper level and. explaining the origin of physical matter. and its interactions. I don't think you. will mathematically describe the origin. of the stuff which the mathematical. descriptions apply to. >> given what I've just said about how what. scientific laws are are observations of. stuff that happens in the universe and. then mathematically describing how they. regularly like occur. I've sometimes. compared this it's a bit of a crude. analogy but it gets across the point to. discovering a book of Shakespeare's.

sonets. If we came across a book of. Shakespeare's sonets and we didn't know. what they were, then we might start. studying them. And suppose that you were. really, really smart and you said, "Okay, well, I've noticed that each of. these letters comes in two kinds. There's a big one and a small one." And. whenever there's a new line, they use. the big one. That's interesting. And you. call that the law of capitalization. And. then you notice that there are all of. these little symbols, unlike the. letters, little dots and squiggles. And. you realize that they show up in. predictable ways. and and you call that.

the law of punctuation and you're able. to predict. If you're really clever, you. might notice that if you say it out. loud, it follows a particular rhythm. Dun dun dun dun dun. And you call that. the law of amic pentameter. You're. getting really clever now. And you can. predict that if I turn over the page, I'm going to see something that follows. these rules. What you're discovering, of. course, are the laws of literacy. >> Mhm. >> And then suppose I came along after all. of that and said, "Okay, so where do you. think the book came from?". >> Yeah. and you said, "Well, we don't know. yet, but look at all the progress we're.

making with the laws that we've. discovered. I'm sure that one day these. laws of literacy will explain where the. book came from." You'd be making a. category error. And I think the. physicist does the same thing in saying. that physics will one day explain the. origin of physical matter because. physics is the study of physical matter. and therefore presupposes its existence. >> A question like that, I don't think can. be answered by science. I'm really not. talking to the 10-year-old anymore. >> I was I [laughter] was about to say I. was about to say your your 10-year-old. is going to be really really smart. >> Okay, Dad. Can I just Can I go to bed. now? >> Yeah. >> Um, but like the reason I bring that up,

it's to say I mean I I remember I was I. was kind of talking about consciousness. and it's all like related because people. have a similar view of consciousness. They think that science will one day. explain what consciousness is. And. >> you're trying to encourage your child to. ask ask questions that I guess are. maybe not comprehensively answered. simply by science. >> Yeah. And and also I want to be very. clear here. Lots of people will use this line of. thought to try to sort of smuggle God in. as like a god of the gap. They'll say, "Okay, so science can't explain it, so.

God must do so." That is categorically. not what I'm doing here, >> right? All I'm saying is that the. lexicon of science cannot describe the. origin of the universe and and the. nature of consciousness. Those are the. two things I think that science. definitely can't describe. That is not. to say therefore God. >> Mhm. >> There might be some kind of what we. might call naturalistic explanation. It's just not one that can be. mathematized. >> and therefore not sort of appropriate to. to use the the lexicon of science to. describe. That's fine. No problem with.

that. Of course, we still have this. question. We still want to know why is. there something rather than nothing? What is the nature of consciousness? But. I want to be very clear that this isn't. some kind of underhanded way to like. motivated reasoning to leave room for. God. is just to say that when people. have this sort of confidence that the. scientific method will explain. everything because it's made such. progress in the past. Notice the precise. nature of the progress it's made. It's. explained things but only at a sort of. deeper level of resolution. It has.

described the mechanism. Take natural. selection brilliantly like Darwin. figures out the mechanism by which. organisms like diversify and become. complex and that's great but it is a. description. It's a description of what. happens. >> And if you, as Fineman says, if you. really do keep following that why. question, you'll get down to some quite. foundational questions which it's less. controversial to say science will not be. able to explain. >> When you put it that way and you look at. both sides, it seems to be more of a. human mind's desire for certainty and.

completeness in thought, which is why we. end up on either side of the spectrum. without the ability to navigate the. messy middle. Right? Specifically in. this case, it's almost like I either. have to believe everything this book. says is absolutely correct. >> without any openness for questioning, thought or reflection, or I have to. believe this book that I learned that. this textbook at school, everything it. says must be correct without any. reflection, thought or need for debate. And so it's almost like how do we get to.

a point where the human mind we allow it. to have the ability to question our. worldview and thoughts without losing. all sense of certainty and stability. because it seems as humans when people. watch a debate nine out of 10 times. people are just watching it to confirm. their bias. >> Sure. So they're already on one side. and you're going to go fully with. God exists but we definitely know. science can't answer all the questions. or on the other side someone's like well. I'm from that religion and that.

religious person is obviously spot on. So even when we watch a debate we don't. really ever come away from it going you. know what I just couldn't believe that. he said that because we're just going. there to confirm our beliefs. So I guess. my question is would you even encourage. people to live in the messy middle of. not being certain about their ideas? Does that create a better human? >> I think that's where they do live. You. think so? >> I mean there are very few things that. people can be certain of. >> in the sense of I I would argue that. most of the people you debate with or.

most religious or scientific people in. the world at least in the form of how. they live are trying to live based on. their belief. >> They have a very strong confidence. Yeah. Not confidence meaning correct. with faith certainty. Yeah. Fedday the. Latin [clears throat] faith. >> I think if you speak to most of those. people they will at least ostensibly say. but I'm open to having my mind change. Particularly scientists. I mean the. whole thing about science is that it's. open for correction. Like no scientist. believes that we've like completed. science. >> Yeah. Of course. >> scientists are very much like one day. they they hope that Einstein will be.

proved completely wrong because it's. exciting and it would like sharpen what. we understand about the universe. You. know what I mean? And so like I don't. think anybody has that kind of. confidence that they've got it all. correct. But I think there is a. confidence in the method and fair enough. have a confidence in the scientific. method because it's great. And again I. love science. I'm not trying to insult. it or anything. I'm just saying be very. precise about what it's doing and what. it's not. And I think we could avoid a. lot of needless debate if we understand. exactly the parameters of like each of.

our disciplines. disciplines like. interact and they merge and stuff, but. like if you're talking about. mathematical models, there are things. that mathematical models just can't do. >> And if you're talking about like thought. experiments in philosophy, there are. things that thought experiments can't. do. They cannot provide empirical proof. of various phenomena. They can't provide. scientific evidence for the big bang. That kind of stuff. But likewise, I. think that the scientific method can't. describe certain foundational aspects of. reality and instead presuppose them. I.

would of course encourage people to to. recognize there's like lots of room to. maneuver here. And I think that's one of. the things that I'm trying to do. And. like it kind of splits people like. especially when I talk about either. consciousness or I talk about the nature. of science. It splits people. There's. kind of three responses to the science. stuff. Some people go that's a load of. nonsense. Of course science explains. things. And then I have to spend a bit. of time really drilling down what they. mean by explain in the fineman sense. Other people say this is really. interesting. Yeah, cool. I'd never. thought about it that way. That's great.

That's exciting. And some people sort of. say, yeah, science doesn't explain in. that sense like description is the same. thing as explan. They just sort of say. it's like trivially true. >> It's not a very profound observation, but it has sort of some profound. implications. If it is true that science. only describes, then as long as you have. an explanatory question left, it's one. that science is not going to be able to. answer. So I I sort of encourage people. to at least explore that thought. It's. totally fine to have confidence in your. conclusions, but like recognize it's. about the method. It's this optimism. about the progress of science because of.

what it's done in the past, which is. great, but you have to be very precise. about exactly what it's done in the past. and what it might therefore mimic in the. future. >> And answering foundational metaphysical. questions. >> about the nature of matter, why it. exists in the first place, that kind of. stuff. I I just don't think it's it's an. appropriate tool. And people will be. thinking in their heads, but hold on, what about like, you know, there are. theories that what about like string. theory? What about the I'm telling you. that if you investigate these closely. enough, you will realize that these are. proposed descriptions of the nature of.

reality. They're proposed descriptions. of what's going on. They don't answer. the why question. And I think you're. left with two options. One is to say the. why question is bogus. Some people think. that. >> and that's fair. Richard Dawkins has. said like if you ask a question like. what is the color of jealousy? It makes. grammatical sense, but it's a. meaningless question. And and the why. question might be the same. Why do. things exist? If that's the case, maybe. there is no why. Maybe there are only. descriptions. In that case, I would. slightly alter my thesis to say. everything is maybe philosophy is. description, right? When when a. Christian says that God is a trinity, they're just describing the nature of.

God, right? They're not explaining why. he's a trinity. Fair enough. But they. would not do so in mathematical like. language. >> Mhm. >> You can't run the ontological argument. for God's existence as a series of. mathematical equations. It's just a. different kind of language that's being. used. I would just say that the. scientific language will not describe. the things which some other. philosophical languages can describe. And that's not a problem. That's great. It's actually not that profound. >> Yeah. >> So many scientists just are like, "Yeah, I mean, you could call it like.

functionalism or descriptivism about. science that what's going on is we're. just describing reality." And that's. great and it's really useful, but I'd. encourage people to just like reflect on. what that means and what it should do to. their confidence that science will. answer these foundational questions. I. started talking about the origin of the. universe because it's it's helpful when. thinking about like Newton and Einstein. to get across what I'm saying about. science. But really when you ask about. what my worldview is, the reason I would. bring that up is to talk about. consciousness and in a similar way say. that science will not explain or at. least will not tell us the nature of of.

consciousness. For me, consciousness is. the most foundational like mystery. It's. probably the foundational fact of. reality. It's the kind of thing which. science can't approach because science. science sort of describes relations. between things. Science uses the. language of mathematics. It's like. quantifying. Consciousness is a quality. It's. qualitative. It's not the kind of thing. that science can talk about. I did a.

panel not long ago that was hosted by. Brian Cox. It was with some. neuroscientists. uh one of whom was. Annel Seth, a good friend of mine, and. the other two who whose names I've. forgotten. I'd only met them that one. time. And they invited me cuz it was the. show called A Question of Science. And. they did all of these episodes on. different scientific topics. And they. did one on consciousness. And I think. they wanted somebody who like wasn't, I. guess, like a neuroscientist. They. wanted like a philosophical perspective. And I remember thinking, okay, sure. I'll I'll do this. I'm very grateful to. be here if if you really think that I'm. I'm an appropriate person. And I.

thought, well, what I can do is I can I. can come along and I can talk about some. philosophical perspectives. I can talk. about pansychism. I can talk about other. traditions and stuff. And I remember. before we started, Brian sort of looked. at the questions that had been submitted. by the audience and was kind of wanting. to get rid of some of them cuz he was. like, well, you know, like this stuff. about like pansychism and whatnot. I. don't think we we should really be. spending any time on on this on this. kind of nonsense. And I was there. It. was really awkward for me because I. suddenly had to be like, oh, that's. actually [laughter] kind of what I'm. what I'm here to do. We had this sort of.

slightly awkward conversation where I. was a bit like, well, you know, I'm. probably going to mention it. He's like, yeah, yeah, I mean, it's good to good to. at least, you know, hear the view, I. suppose, kind of that kind of thing. Um, and then the show started and look, I. love these guys, you know, and and and. they're obviously geniuses and I know. nothing about neuros well, not nothing, but you know, I'm not a neuroscientist, but it struck me if you watch the first. bit of this, the first question is, what. do we think consciousness is? very. difficult thing to define. I think it's. impossible to precisely define, but a. famous definition was given by Thomas. Nagel in the 70s. To be conscious means.

there's something it is like to be you. There's something it is like to be this. thing. Therefore, it's conscious. It's. like an inward sense of subjectivity. And we went around the panel and. everyone agreed. Everyone was like, "Yeah, yeah, that's a great definition. I agree with that. That's fair enough.". Then the first question came, can we see. consciousness in the brain? Great. question. And one by one, each of the. neuroscientists said some really. interesting things, but I felt just hadn't answered the. question.

>> Annel actually said at one point, you. know, we can kind of put this question. of like consciousness like to the to the. side or on the shelf or something like. that. And we can talk about like the. brain activity that's going on when the. conscious experience happens. And there. was someone else who was talking about. um how when people have like. hallucinations, it's like although to. them they feel as real as as actual. sight, different brain activity is. happening when they think they see. something versus when they that's really. that's great. That's re this is all. really interesting stuff about. neuroscience. But it got around to me.

and I turned to the question I was like. I think the answer is no. And I think. what we've we've just heard has kind of. proved that because what you're doing is. you're talking about brain chemistry. You're talking about neurons. You're. talking about the neural coralates of. consciousness. You're not talking about. consciousness itself. And I remember. sitting there thinking like this is sort. of quite strange to me because a lot of. the sort of running thread throughout. this when I said but like what about the. nature of what consciousness actually. is? What about the explanation of like. why we're conscious? There's sometimes. this feeling of like well that's not.

really really a legitimate question. >> Yeah. It's enough to just describe the. neural coralates. It's enough to just. describe the bra brain activity. And I'm. like, that's fair enough. If that's what. you think, if you don't think that's an. interesting question, then fine. But. then why are we here at an event called. what is consciousness? It would sort of be like if we were at a. an event that was like talking about. like football and somebody asked about. why the offside rule exists and somebody. started talking about how like well you. know it's a bit like in basketball where. this how or it's a bit like in cricket.

or it's a bit like and then I said but. hold on like I I I want to talk about. like actually football. people might think I'm being a little. unfair. I'd encourage them to just watch. it themselves. Like I I don't mean to to. disparage these people. As I say, they. are geniuses and they do very important. work. But I think it's quite clear to me. that when we're talking about what. consciousness is, we're just not talking. about the same thing. >> I'm talking about the experience. I'm. talking about the redness of red. I'm. talking about like the feeling of cold. on your skin. I'm not talking about a. neuron firing. And I don't think those.

are the same thing. So that the common. view amongst materialists is that. experiences are just the same thing as. brain activity. And I understand that. thought, but they can't literally be the. same thing. I'll tell you why. There's a. law. It's called Linets's law which says. that if two things are identical, they. share precisely the same properties. >> If X and Y are identical, that is they. are the same thing, then all of the. properties of X are shared by Y. You. can't say that two things are the same, and I don't mean the same kind of thing.

I mean literally the same thing, but one. of them is red and one of them is blue, or one of them is five-sided and one of. them is two-sided. That would mean that. they're different things. Even spatial. location, they have all the same. properties except this one's in China. and this one's in France. That means. they're not identical. >> Yeah. >> Let's think about the content of your. like mental experience, right? You can. imagine a triangle in your head. I'm. told that the triangle that I can. literally see in my head right now is. the same thing the same thing as some. neurons firing. I don't think so because.

they don't have the same properties. The. triangle has three sides. That's a fact. about the triangle in my head. the. neurons firing that correlate with my. experience with that triangle don't have. three sides. >> Meaning [clears throat] that you've got. two sort of things with different sets. of properties, meaning they can't. literally be identical. Maybe one causes. the other. Maybe one emerges from the. other. Maybe that's fine. We're not. saying anything too crazy at the moment. But the idea that they are literally the. same thing, I think just doesn't make.

much sense. With everything you just. mentioned, how do you then explain what. is a good life to a 10-year-old? >> I think one of the reasons why I. wouldn't have a child at the moment is. because I don't know how to answer that. question. Love that answer. Yeah, >> it's a very serious question. If you. don't have an idea of what makes the. good life, then it's going to be very. difficult to raise a child. I mean, people say that when you choose your. life partner, who's going to be the. other parent to your child? So the the.

mother or father of your child depending. on who you are, one of the most. important things is that you're aligned. on like core values and stuff. Why? Because when it comes to raising. children, you'll have to have the same. idea of what a good life is, right? So. in the same way why you you might not. want to get married and have children. with someone with whom you haven't. aligned your fundamental values. I. almost sort of am not married to myself. in that way because there's too much. internal conflict. I sort of. >> I I disagree. with myself too much to to have a good.

answer to that question. But also I'm. not confident that I ever will. And so I. think ultimately what people typically. say. >> is either they have a particular. worldview and they say, "Well, son, the. the good life is to do what God. commands." And that's kind of fair. enough as well because that still leaves. room for the kid to go and work out who. is God and what does God command, right? It's actually quite broad, but I think. if I were forced to say something, I. would ask what they mean by good. You. know, I'm not sure if this is the kid. asking me, but the word good is a is a. is a difficult thing to unpack. You. know, there's morally good or there's.

good in the sense that this is a good. table because it holds things up. And. some people think that's the same thing. >> But I think there are probably. indicators of of a of a good life that. include like contentment and calm and. lack of stress and that kind of stuff, confidence in the decisions that you've. made. But I find it a very difficult. question to answer. M do you find that. the way you think about life and the. world stops you from living practically. or can or how do you balance the two? How do you allow yourself to be someone. who quite because that's what I was.

trying to get at earlier is that when. you have even somewhat of a false. conviction in your belief whatever that. may be life somewhat is easier to live. >> Yeah. >> Because you just get on with it. And and. I consider myself to be someone who's. who lives more in the middle and thinks. things through too. But I realized that. that comes with a lot of uncertainty in. the sense that you could totally have a. 180 spin moment in your life because. you're like, "Oh, well, wait a minute. I. kind of believe that's true and that's. kind of not." Now, I prefer living like. that because I think it leads to new.

learning and curiosity and change and. transformation, which I think are. actually better than just pretending to. agree with something. But I guess where. does your philosophy fail you in. practical life? I think that most people. don't live strictly according to. philosophical principles. I think they. develop philosophical principles based. on how they live. >> Agreed. I think it's kind of the other. way. I like that. Yeah, I like that. And. I think that the best so L Vickenstein. in his tractus.

which is like a a sort of very sort of. mathematical quite short work has this. introduction. and the first words he writes are this. book may only be of use to people who. already agree with its contents. and I think that's so fair enough. This. might seem like a weird thing to say in. response to your question, but like I. don't think people just read like a. philosophy and become convinced by it. I. think they hear somebody put something. they already kind of think in the right.

words and they go, "Yes, >> hey, I like that.". >> Yeah, that's what I That's what I think. Which is why I think people are. sometimes a little bit confused if they. want to get into philosophy. They look. up the hundred best philosophers and. they think, "Okay, let's go and learn. about it." And just out of the blue, it. says, "Oh, you should go and read like. Jean Paul Sartra." Okay. So, they pick. it up and they read it and they're like, I not I don't really get this, you know, or this doesn't make much sense to me. Or they read Spinosza and they're like, "What are you talking about? I don't. it's a bit mathsy. I don't really. understand." Right? And it's because. that's not how philosophy is supposed to.

be done. People sometimes ask me, "Where. would you recommend I start? Have you. got any recommendations for like how to. get into philosophy?" And my advice is. always very simple. Just read whatever. you've heard of. And the reason for that. is because if you've heard of someone, it means you've been in contexts where. they have come up, right? Like if you. listen to loads of Jordan Peterson, you'll have heard him talk about nature. Now you might never have read Nature, but the fact that you are so attracted. to Peterson and the fact that he's so. attracted to nature means it's likely if. you read Nature, you're going to find. something that you like in there, right? Likewise, if you listen to Christian.

apologists on YouTube, you might have. heard them talk about the church fathers. or Augustine or people like this. In. which case, just read that because. there's a reason why you're attracted to. the people who are attracted to those. bits of content, right? Because to some. degree, you can read a philosophy and go. that's an interesting argument that. makes sense. But you're not going to. read it and and it sort of wash over you. with this wave of conviction. I think. unless you've already got one foot in. that worldview and it's just somebody. has finally put into words what you were. thinking this whole time. And so I think. that we're very intuitive creatures and.

I think that our philosophizing often. gets in the way. I think that we act. according to our intuition and our. emotional impulses all the time and then. we rationalize them after the fact and. then we debate about who was right and. wrong. And there's so much to be said. about this. For example, ethics. really. important branch of philosophy, what is. right, what is wrong. You've got meta. ethics which is like defining what. goodness is. You've got practical ethics. which is like particular case like. studies. You know what do we do in the.

case of abortion, euthanasia, that kind. of stuff. And if you look at how people. do ethics, it's extremely interesting. They'll come up with a theory, say. utilitarianism, right? the the right. thing to do is is to bring about the. least suffering for the least number or. the most pleasure for the most people, the fewest number, I should say, and. someone says, "Okay, that sounds good.". And then how how would you test that. theory? Well, you think of a a scenario. You go, "Okay, but hold on. What if what.

if there was a a healthy person who. walked into a hospital and there were. five people who needed organ transplants. and you could kill that innocent person, steal their organs and and most people. go, "No, no, no. That that would be. wrong." Okay, then we need to go back. and revise our theory. Hold on. Why? I. thought the whole point of having an. ethical theory was to tell us what right. and wrong are. But now you're saying if. you don't like the conclusion, you just. go back and edit the theory. What's. going on there? It's because we already. have intuitions about the outcome and we.

have certain intuitions about the input. It's not as simple as like we're going. to rationally work out what the standard. of ethics is and then that will tell us. what to do. It's like we're going to. come up with a kind of theory that. captures how we already behave and if it. doesn't capture how we already behave. then we're going to edit it slightly. And so the process of meta ethics or. practical ethics coming up with these. theories is in many cases actually just. working out what we already believe but. doing it precisely. It's like, you know, most people care about animals. They. love animals, but then they pay for.

factory farming. Okay. And and you could. have a discussion about this and you. could say, well, actually, you know, I'm. not sure. So, their theory might be, I. think you should not cause unnecessary. harm. And then you say, yeah, but you're. palming animals in factory farms. They. go, oh, okay, maybe then, well, we. shouldn't. And they'll go and edit the. theory because what you're doing is. you're precisely working out what you. already believe. Well, you're protecting. your world view. You're allowed to have. your version. Yeah. But it's not just. it's not just a you're not just like. protecting it defensively. You're just. like no this is what I believe and so. I'm going to edit the theory. John Rules. the political philosopher had this.

concept of the reflective equilibrium. So he thought that what happened you can. sort of imagine this like machine right. and we have inputs which are our. theories about what's right and wrong. And those theories give us outputs. So. we input a theory which sounds. plausible. we should minimize suffering. and it gives us an output like well then. you should kill everyone instantly and. actually don't hold on that's not quite. right. So then you sort of you adapt the. income. It's like okay we we actually. need to minimize suffering without. killing people or also you know have. some kind of pleasure and then it puts.

out other outcomes and you sort of got. this back and forth and the machine in. the middle like you know mixes it all up. and gives you the output and rules kind. of says that the way this works is you. come at it from like both sides. you've. got intuitive like outcomes and you've. got like intuitive theoretical. suggestions and you sort of do this back. and forth, this tug of war between them. until they kind of balance out a bit and. you get this reflective equilibrium and. that that's what we're doing when we're. coming up with theories. It is never as. simple as somebody like writing a book. and saying right I'm going to prove to.

you from first principles that abortion. is wrong specifically from the eighth. week. That's never going to happen ever. They're going to rely on intuitions that. you already have about people and the. worth of humans and bodily autonomy and. they're going to convince you that way. So if you become really learned in the. traditions of philosophy, that can be. really interesting. But you'll notice. that a lot of philosophers can talk. about these big ideas with absolutely no. personal investment in them. They'd be. like, oh, you know, like so nature. thought that God was dead and that this. was a great tragedy and they're sort of.

talking it as this historical artifact. They got zero personal sort of input in. there and so they're obviously not going. to use that to like guide their life in. any way and if they did it would just. lead to confusion. There's like a skit I. saw once I think like someone's on an. airplane and they've they're dying and. you know they're like is there a doctor. on board and someone shows up and says I. I'm a doctor. I'm a doctor of philosophy. and they're like oh well what should we. do? We need to save this man. And it's. like, well, you know, the utilitarian. would say that we should take resources. from other people, but then the. deontologists would say that that would.

that would upset their rights. And then, well, if you're a Christian, maybe we. should go and then they just die, right? Because you're spending too much time. sort of going back and forth. I don't. think that's how people actually behave, right? And I think there's some there's. some like neurological evidence for this. to do with the two hemispheres of your. brain, which is another thing I'm. fascinated by. I think the most. significant fact perhaps in the world is. that your brain is divided into two. hemispheres. Why do you think that's the. most significant fact in the world? >> Because if you are essentially your. brain, which okay, I don't think. consciousness is the same thing as the.

brain, but they're clearly connected, right? And the thing that at least gives. you selfhood, I don't think it produces. consciousness, just to be crystal clear, but I think selfhood, the thing that. gives you your unified sense of self is. essentially your brain and maybe the. rest of your sort of neural system. And the fact that everywhere we look, every neural system we find, there's. some kind of asymmetrical division in. the brain. there's some evolutionarily. strong reason to keep two separate. hemispheres has to be super significant. That's like the nature of you, right?

That's that's your nature. Your nature. is fundamentally lateralized. Your two. hemispheres are kind of involved in. different ways of thinking. It's never. quite as simple as people think. I mean, Ian McGill is the person to read on. this. In culture, it's like the right. brain is creative and intuitive and the. left brain is mathsy and and rational. It's not as simple as that. Miguel Chris. likes to say that the two hemispheres. sort of attend to the world in different. ways. The left brain is about sort of. manipulation.

and the right brain is more like big. picture, right? And we know that this is. this is the case. I mean, McIll theory. is that the reason this occurs is. because as an organism you need to be. simultaneously looking out for like. prey. You need to be manipulating your. environment while looking out for. predators at the same time. And there's. some evidence to suggest that this is. the case. Uh birds have eyes on either. side of their head or lizards which have. eyes on the sides of their head are. really useful because the right eye. feeds the left hemisphere and the left. eye feeds the right hemisphere. With us. it's complicated cuz they're on the.

front. So with animals on the side it's. much easier. And there's evidence of. birds for example if they're like. building a nest they will favor using. their right eye even when it makes it. more difficult because the left brain is. engaged in the manipulation stuff. And. likewise, you know, you could put a. lizard in a room and put a predator and. it will look at the predator with its. left eye. Even if you cover up its left. eye, it will still try to look at it. with the left eye, right? So, there's. some evidence to suggest this is the. case. And the same kind of thing is. going on with us. We've got these two.

brains and they they kind of do. different things. And so, have you ever. come across split brain patients? This. was my favorite thing to discover ever. in history is really famous um within. like brain science. I suppose the two. hemispheres are connected by this tissue. called the corpus colossum. This uh sort. of bundle of tissues there used to be. this treatment for extreme cases of. epilepsy called a corpus calistomy which. is where the connection is severed.

Epilepsy is like an electrical storm in. the brain. And so one way to try to. minimize it was literally just to cut. the two hemispheres like at their. connective tissue. And so people who'd. had this operation done were known as. split brain patients because the. hemispheres have been disconnected. They're still they can still communicate. slightly through other means, but their. main source of communication is is. inhibited. If you met one of these. people, you wouldn't know. They're just. perfectly normal. They'll speak to you. like I'm speaking to you now. Everything's totally fine. But in. experimental conditions, you can prove.

some really weird things. For example, speech and language communication is. broadly speaking governed by the front. left part of your brain. Left. hemisphere. Remember the left hemisphere. controls like the right hand side of. your body and the right hemisphere. controls the left hand side of your. body. So with humans because our eyes. are on the front, our right visual field. goes to the left brain and our left. visual field goes to the right brain. So. in a split brain patient, they look at a. screen. You can watch this experiment on. YouTube by the way. They're looking at a. screen and on the right hand side of the.

screen it will flash a word. So it goes. to their left hemisphere and it will say. umbrella and they'll say umbrella. Car. chair chair. Then they'll flash a word. on the left hand side of the screen. So. just the right hemisphere and it will. say cowboy hat and they'll say I didn't. see anything. I didn't see anything. I I. don't know what you're talking about. And then the experimentter gives them a. pencil in their left hand and tells them. to draw something and they draw a cowboy. hat. >> cuz the right hemisphere saw it. >> and so the left hand can draw it. But if.

you ask them, they'll say that they. didn't see it. >> Wow. >> Because the left hemisphere, which. controls speech, broadly, that's a bit. of an oversimplification, but broadly. speaking, didn't see it. And so they. can't tell you that they saw it. So they. saw it and they didn't see it at the. same time. So fascinating, right? Means. you've kind of got these two brains that. are both doing different things. And I. think the most significant experiment of. this kind is where and and bear in mind. these people are agreeing and and. thankfully so they've already been. through a traumatic experience and now. they're agreeing to do these. experiments. They're waiting.

instructions, right? So you can flash an. instruction to the right hemisphere of. the brain and the instruction will say. something like uh get up and walk over. to the window. So the patient stands up. and they walk over to the window and. then the instructor says why did you. just do that? And you know what they. say? It would be weird enough if they. said, "I don't know." Right? But they. don't. They make something up and they. believe it. It's called confabulation, right? Like they they they say something. like, "Oh, um, I was getting a bit warm. and I just wanted some fresh air." We.

know that's not why they did it. >> But their left brain has convinced them. that that is why they did it. Now, the. reason I'm talking about all of this is. because this has given rise to the idea. that the left brain is the so-called. interpreter. that the right brain kind. of intuitively does stuff and then the. left brain retrospectively sort of. rationalizes and justifies that. behavior. In split brain patients, you. can prove it experimentally. But the. idea is that in healthy brains, you. couldn't prove it, but the same thing. might be going on. So, you know, when. you see someone who like they're arguing.

with the taxi driver and and you're. like, why are you shouting at that guy? And they're like, because you know, he. didn't give me my change. And you're. like, well, actually, the reason you're. shouting at him is because your dog died. yesterday. That's the real reason that. you're shouting at him. Like we know. that this kind of thing happens all the. time, but I think it happens like. literally all the time. I think like so. much of our decision-m we just. intuitively move throughout the world. and then our left brain interprets what. we've done and rationalizes it after the. fact. And I think that so much of our. philosophizing is like this is very like. leftbrain dominant. And Ian Mcgel says.

that one of the problems that we face as. a sort of society is that we become too. leftbrain dominant in our thinking. Everything is sort of hyperrationalized. and discrete sort of abstracted and none. of it is intuitive. None of it is is. flux. None of it is continuous. But that. is the nature of reality. So Imagoka's. first book was called the master and his. emissary. The master and his emissary. And the idea is that the right brain. does stuff and the left brain is the. emissary. But there's this there's some.

kind of myth or story where an emissary. thinks that he can do the job of the. master. So he kills the master and then. ends up doing a terrible job. [laughter]. and he kind of thinks that's what's. happened with our with our left brain. So, the reason that I I brought that up. is because when you asked like how do. you sort of navigate the world not. having a certain philosophy and I think. we all navigate the world extremely. intuitively and that when we come up. with reasons and explanations for our. behaviors a lot of the time those are. like post hawk rationalizations without. us even realizing it. It also has. profound implications for free will of.

course because we think you know why you. performed a particular action but is. that just because your brain has. convinced you that that's why you did it. when it's not the real reason at the. very least whatever the reason is it's. something that the that the left brain. might not be able to communicate because. it might be a very right brain kind of. thing. But yeah, these split brain. patients, I mean I I don't know if you. agree. I think that it's one of the most. significant facts in the world because. also it might interest you if if you're. interested in the Indian traditions that. we were talking about earlier like the. concept of the self, right? Once you. have experimental evidence that an.

individual self can both see something. and not see it at the same time, I think. that has profound implications for the. idea of the unity of personhood. Like. how many people are there? If you want. to say there's only one person, you have. to admit a literal contradiction that it. is both true and false that they saw it, which you can't do. There has to be like. a part of them which saw it. At the very. least, you have to say part of them saw. it and part of them didn't. And. immediately at the very least what. you've done is you said that the self. can be split into parts that's hugely. profound because if your left brain and.

your right brain can have independent. sort of centers of awareness and yet. somehow are also part of this one. connective thing I think that has some. profound implications for the fact that. I've got a brain and you've got a brain. but there are great many philosophical. traditions who think that we're all sort. of part of one great big thing. It at. least opens the door to all kinds of. interesting and it's sort of like when I. tell people this if they haven't heard. about split brain patients they're sort. of like what really I'm like yeah like. this stuff is way more complicated and.

way more weird than I think a lot of. people realize. Is there anything that. we can do to activate our right brain. more? That's a question for Ian. McGillchrist, but I mean I I don't know, but I would guess that like tuning in to. the way that the right brain is supposed. to attend to the world and and read. McGillchrist on this and just try to. tune into that part of yourself. Try to. recognize that there is a part of. reality that consists in that kind of. stuff that escapes the sort of. hyperrationalization of leftrain ways of.

thinking. And I think a lot of that. comes through like people are said to be. a bit more leftrained or a bit more. rightrained. And in culture that that. tends to manifest as like if you're. right you like sort of music and art and. poetry. Left-handedness was associated. with creativity for a long time. Although that would be quite a fun fact. I think that's actually not true. That's. not connected in that way. But like. culturally we have these sort of. associations. And I think that they then. they don't give you a tool a very good. picture of what's actually happening. with the brain. But I think it can be a. sort of good way of thinking about the. kinds of practices and ways of thinking.

that you might want to engage with to to. stop being so hyperrational. And also. pay attention when you are convinced. that you know why you're doing. something. Just step back and and really. think about what might be going into it. It's literally what I said at the. beginning of this conversation when I. said, you know, why are you an atheist? It's because the contingency argument. for God's existence is unound or it's. because my parents divorced when I was. nine. The first of those is a very. leftrained answer. The second of those. is a very right brain answer. And so if. you're having an argument with your. wife, you know, CS Lewis in the in the.

Screw Tape Letters, which is a wonderful. little novel where there's this like. demonic under secretary, like there's. sort of a demonic civil service and this. demon has been tasked with a particular. human who he's trying to make into an. atheist. And one of the instructions. that he has is like when this person has. an argument with his wife, convince him. that they're arguing about the dishes. when they're not really. Cuz he's going. to come home and he's going to say, you. know, his wife's going to say, "You. didn't do the dishes today." And he's. going to go, "For goodness sake, I've.

had a long day at work." And she's going. to go, "Yeah, but you never do the. bloody." And he's going to really You're. going to you're going to raise your. voice me right now because I didn't do. the dishes this morning. Because it's. not about the dishes. She's not saying. you didn't do the dishes. She's saying, "I feel like you don't pull your weight. around the house and you don't listen to. me and I don't feel heard." Now this is. very sort of like self-helpy type stuff. you know you sit on podcast like this. and you sort of go like you know and. like really you need to like listen to. your but like I think very specifically. we are literally becoming convinced that. like we know why we are acting and. behaving in particular ways when we're.

not because our left brain is. rationalizing things for us. So just. take a step back think a bit more. intuitively about like what's going on. in a in a very sort of nonrational. abstracted kind of way. Don't try to. think about this individual case and go, "Okay, let's let's trace the logic.". Just like step back and like feel for a. minute, you know, like like reintegrate. feeling into your life. That's that's. probably a helpful starting point. >> Yeah. Alex, thank you so much. What a. joy talking to you. I feel like I've. totally had my mind expanded today and. stretched in so many different.

directions. Yeah. Both both both sides. I wanted to end with you on what we do. on the show called The Final Five, but. I've kind of edited it for you because I. felt there were a few more questions I. wanted to sneak in there. So it might. end up being a final 10. These questions. have to be answered in one sentence. maximum. >> And so Alex Okconor, these are your. final 10 only made for you. Brought to. you by State Farm. What's the hardest. question you've ever asked yourself? >> What is consciousness? >> If you're wrong about everything you. believe, which belief would hurt most?

>> That my friends and family love me. >> Great answer. What do you think is the. most dangerous idea people believe. without questioning? >> That we can have certainty about the. will. of the creator of the universe. and that it's engaged in the. peculiarities of human affairs and human. political affairs. Is that one sentence? >> That that counts. That counts. You got.

it all out in one breath. That counts. What do you think people are most afraid. to admit about life? >> That it comes to an end. >> I wanted to talk to you about that as a. final theme. Why does death feel so unnatural? You've. talked about consciousness. What have. you learned about death? >> Well, there are a few answers to that. You said, why does death feel so. unnatural? Which is a weird way of. putting it, but I think like. >> you think it's weird. Why? >> For many people, death is is a part of. nature. But it's interesting to hear you. say unnatural because there are.

philosophical traditions like if you're. someone who believes that life exists. after death, you'll either believe that. because you think that we're going to. like heaven and this mortal realm is. sort of a purgatory realm of sorts or. maybe you think that we're all made of. consciousness and we're all going to. sort of reintegrate into Brahman, you. know, either way that would mean that. our true nature is Brahman. for one of a better term right. and that the divided physical biological.

selves that we currently inhabit are not. our real selves. Right? This is one of. the the biggest teachings of of advice. is that your your self is an illusion. There is one self the atlan it's one. self and that atman is the same thing as. brahman. There's just one great big. thing such that the thing that comes to. an end when you die is not yourself. It's or rather it's the illusion of. yourself but it's not the self. the self. persists, the self is eternal. It's. another sort of huge uh theme of of the.

of the Hindu scriptures. And so to hear. you describe death as unnatural is kind. of interesting because these people. would say that's because it's not. natural because your true nature is. eternal. The self is eternal and what. you're calling yourself is actually. unnatural and that's the thing that will. come to an end. So some people might. answer that for me like death is. terrifying and it can be terrifying for. two reasons. One is that you think it's. lights off and everything comes to an. end. The other is that you think there. is something after death and it's bad. [laughter] Right? People are genuinely.

terrified of of concepts of hell and. divine torment for the behaviors that. they engaged in while they were alive. And a lot of that comes from like. religious upbringings in particular, doctrines about the nature of hell, which I think are not very biblical to. say the least. But there's sort of two. flavors of fear there. on the hell. stuff. It requires essentially a. metaphysical investigation into the. nature of God and whether that God would. allow such suffering for finite crimes. But with the lights off kind of thing,

which I think more people are kind of. freaked out by, you know, some people. say, "Oh, but it's, you know, it's like. before I was born, you know, like I was. I was dead for thousands of years before. I was born and it never bothered me.". That helps some people because it at. least makes you realize that you're not. going to experience it, you know, if the. lights really go off. And Epicurus. famously said, you know, like if like. when is death bad? It can't be bad now. because I'm not dead. And it can't be. bad for me when I'm dead because there's. no me. So there's no point at which it. can be true. Like Epicurus kind of wants. to say if something is true, there has.

to be a time at which it's true. >> There has to be some time at which this. fact is true. So if the if the fact is. death is bad for me, my death is bad for. me, when is that fact true, can't be. true now because I'm not dead, can't be. true later because there's no me. And. people hear that and they go, "Oh, very. clever." But it doesn't really it. doesn't really do much, right? Because. again, that's a very leftful frame way. of thinking. Very clever, but I'm still. kind of concerned, right? >> Because of my convictions about the. nature of consciousness, >> I'm at least agnostic enough about sort. of experiences, by which I mean like.

experiences with an apostrophe, experiences, connection to physicality. I'm agnostic enough about that that I'm. kind of not super worried about the. death of my physical body. I have no. idea what's going to happen. I do know. that if I if I do die and it all just. sort of shuts off, then I won't be. around to to worry about it and I'm only. around to worry about it now. But I, you. know, I think about it like like. everybody does. But in some way that I. can't quite explain and it's a reason. why I wouldn't really talk about it. except to sort of hint at it in a. situation like this is to say that these.

investigations into the nature of. consciousness and the nature of the. brain and sweat brain and stuff in some. way I can't quite describe just has. consoled me a little bit about the fact. that one day my physical brain is going. to like end you know because I don't. know if if that's quite the same thing. as what as what I am exactly you know. well it is the same thing as what I am. as a self and I I'm worried about the. self coming to an end. But I guess one. way of thinking about it as well is that. like the thing that's scary about death. is not the secession of biological like. function, right? You could have a.

biological machine that has no. consciousness. It's not worried about. death. The thing that death really. people think about death in terms of the. end of life, but really death is kind of. the end of consciousness. That's what. people are scared about. Maybe. consciousness has to manifest physically. in which case when you die your. consciousness sort of ends and that's a. bad thing, right? What's really ending there is not your. biological makeup. It's not the fact. that your your leg and your arm start. disintegrating. It's the fact that your. experience, your unified sense of self.

has come to an end. And one slightly. naive approach to this might be to say. that like I'm not convinced that the. self exists. Not just because of the sort of weird. esoteric, you know, Indian philosophy. and stuff, but also because of the split. brain stuff. I I think all of this kind. of stuff points to the idea that the. idea of the self as we commonly. understand it is a bit of an illusion. And it is interesting to me that this is. the same kind of truth that is. discovered by ancient authors of the. Apananishads and like a modern teenager.

who's never read a word of Sanskrit who. takes LSD and they sort of have these. similar I think that might have. something to do with the usage of. psychedelics in the in the formulation. the Vaders that's a whole another. subject with Soma you know the the the. mysterious substance that brings all of. these profound spiritual truths that are. uncannily similar to the profound. spiritual truths that people find today. when they take psychedelic drugs. But. one of the foundational things that. people discover in this regard is that. the self is an illusion. The self does. not exist. Even Sam Harris, the new. atheist, doesn't believe in the self.

And so if death is not just about. biological function, it's the sessation. of the self, there's something about the. fact that I don't think the self exists. even now that gives me some consolation. You know, if the fear is what happens. when the self comes to an end, like the. self never came to a beginning. So, I. don't even know how to answer that. question. But I don't I don't say that. that's not going to help people. Like. it's not going to I was asked about this. recently at one of these schools I was. talking about as well. Like this this. kid sort of asked me and I can always. tell sometimes when people ask certain.

questions, they mean different things. Like if someone says, "Should we be. afraid of hell?" I can tell in their. face they're asking that because they're. interested in the philosophy. They want. to hear about Epicurus. Or they're. asking that because they're scared of. death. Somebody asks me, "Do you think. hell is biblical?" They're either asking. that because they're interested in New. Testament studies or because they're. staying up at night and afraid of death. and afraid of hell. To the person who's. afraid, I find it quite difficult to. approach except to say take heart that. there are philosophical schools. available to you that you should look at. at least first before you sort of lose. your mind or worry. If I'm not trying to.

help other people and I'm just telling. you about myself, like yeah, it it opens. up this world. But I think it's funny. like I would encourage people to. investigate some of the Indian. philosophical traditions. Not because. there's this kind of idea in like. western thought that there's this sort. of spiritual kind of thing over there. It's this kind of like cool mystical. thing and like oh there's all these. profound it's like actually they're. talking about the same stuff that we're. talking about. They're just doing it in. a different way that might make things. click a little bit. And also talking. about the Indian school of philosophy is. is like talking about the western cannon.

of philosophy. The western cannon is. like you know Kant or maybe John Stewart. Mill and people and it's not like all. westerners are running around in. accordance with those principles right. but I do think it's uncanny that. somebody will say to me I've looked. everywhere I can I've I've I've studied. philosophy I've I've tried to I've. looked at religious traditions and I've. prayed and I've gone to church and I I. still don't have these answers and I'm. still afraid of death and it's like okay. hear me out. Have you ever tried reading. a word of any kind of non-western.

philosophical cannon? And if the answer. is no, I'm not promising you're going to. find it there. But I'm saying there is. so much more for you to do before you. can confidently have even a view, I. think, on the nature of the self, the. nature of death. Because most of our. philosophical convictions are so. culturally embedded with it without us. realizing it that if you don't step. outside of that for a moment, you might. just be following a thread that you are. not the author of. And so I'd recommend. stepping outside of that. And I'm not. just saying that. I think people have. noticed that over the course of of my.

recent trajectory and the things that. I'm talking about. This is just. something that I've done. There's a lot. to say about that. I spoke to a guy. called Thomas Metsinger on my show about. this. And so people want to kind of. really know what I'm talking about when. I say all that. I'd recommend they go. and watch that. If you're worried about. it, also just realize that you're not. alone. This is like the foundational. question of of human existence. I think. it's weird not to be worried about it. It's sort of strange to me that people. aren't talking about it all the time. We. also have a a sort of cultural reticence. to talk about death. You know, death.

used to be much more present. Dead. bodies in the street, plagues, all this. kind of stuff. Co sort of brought that. back into sharp focus for a lot of. people, but death is a bit of a taboo. and we don't really like to talk about. it in polite society. And I think maybe. that's also part of the problem. >> Yeah. Last three uh one sentence. >> That was more than one sentence. >> No, no, but I asked you to. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah. No, no, no. I I knew what I. was doing. I asked you to. All right. Last three. One sentence. We ask this to. every guest who's ever been on the show. What is the best advice you've ever. heard or received? Enjoy it. >> Simple.

>> Well, like there have been contexts in. which. I've been so caught up. I remember like the first time I did a. big cinema podcast shoot where I had. like a whole camera crew and a big guest. and I was really excited about it and I. I was like reading this guest's books. I. was looking at criticism. I I was like. obsessive over preparing. I was so. ready. And I spoke to a friend of mine. who's in the same industry and I just. asked him cuz he' done this kind of. stuff before and I said like you got any.

advice like any last minute advice and. he just said enjoy it and I was like huh. yeah good point. >> We're so we're so often just like not. present. I think anytime anyone's about. to do something important, if someone's. about to like play their first gig or. they're about to do some big career move. that they've been waiting for for a long. time or about to get married or. something and they're sort of so in. their head about it and they're like. they're they're living in the future and. then suddenly they're living in the. past. It's just it's, you know, it's the. sort of be where your feet are like live. in the present kind of thing. But but.

specifically like enjoy it. Take a. moment to look around and be like, "Yeah, this is this is cool.". >> Yeah, I love that. Uh two more. questions. Uh we talked about this. earlier. Why have you stopped saying yes. to as many debates? >> They're about ego. >> Oh, that was your reason, too. Interesting. >> Well, I mean, if you want one sentence, that's what I would say. And it's not. always about my ego. It's not always. about their ego. It's either the case. that you've got one person who just. wants to prove a point and one person. who wants to get truth, in which case.

the egotistical one is going to probably. trounce them and it's going to be a bit. unfair. or you've got two people who. both are egotistically trying to prove a. point in which case it becomes a mess. and a shouting match. If you have two. people that everyone has ego, everyone. but if you have two people who recognize. that, try to mitigate it and try to give. it a backseat to having a good. conversation, it's kind of just no. longer a debate almost by definition. >> So, no one wants to do that anymore. >> Well, people do and I do debates.

sometimes, but I don't enjoy them. They're also extremely like expensive. time-wise cuz you have to prepare. It's. like preparing for an exam. You don't. know what's going to come up. You don't. like if they [clears throat] score a. point that you weren't ready for, it's. going to be embarrassing. And that is. fun. It's it's it's sport, you know. And. look, there is nothing wrong with sport. There's absolutely nothing wrong with. it. It's fun, but you have to know that. that's what you're doing. Debates are. like boxing matches, you know. They will. sometimes tell you who the better boxer. is. They might not even tell you who the.

better boxer is. It'll tell you who. boxed better in that match, but it won't. tell you who the better boxer is. overall. And it definitely won't tell. you who the better fighter is. You have. no idea what would happen if they met in. a bar, no holds barred, and they were. able to use intelligence and weapons and. call their friends and stuff like that. You have no idea what would happen. Similarly, somebody in a debate, it's. like a sparring match. You're going to. see who's better at that particular. dance, but you have no idea what would. happen if you gave them a week to think. about your point, consult all their. resources, and respond to you properly. And so I think that the the sweet spot.

is somewhere in between those. Let's not. take a week to respond, but let's not be. like snapping back with qu. But but. having said that, a lot of people are. quick to say like, oh, like I don't do. debates because they're not about. getting to truth. Like I do debates. sometimes because they're fun. They're. fun and they are interesting and you do. bring up interesting points and they do. become these spectacles and they they do. bring people into like thinking about. these issues and that that's quite fun, but you have to recognize that that's. what you're doing such that afterwards. if it goes really well, you go great. Oh, cool. Fun. I won. But it's like if. you win a chess match or something like,

"Oh, sweet. Cool. Anyway, like let's. play again sometime, you know, and you. might lose next time." That's the. attitude you have to have. If you become. convinced that you're like Magnus. Carlson because you won one chess match, even if you are Magnus Carson, like that. only means you're good at chess, you. know? >> Yeah. Well said. Uh, fifth and final. question. We ask this to every guest. who's ever been on the show. If you. could create one law that everyone in. the world had to follow, what would it. be? >> No. playing pop music in like fancy. restaurants.

>> What should they play instead? >> Anything else? Something that's suitable. to the environment. I wrote a piece on. this recently. It's my least favorite. thing about the world is the fact that. it's not just fancy restaurants. It's. like you go to like a nice cafe or you. go into even like a hotel lobby or. something and you think about how much. effort has been put into designing every. single aspect. which chairs have more. fenue, you know, which which wallpaper. is going to sort of bring about the.

particular mood that we're trying to and. then they just decide to just they put. zero thought into the music. You know, I've left restaurants before because if. you're going to a restaurant, you know, it's it's a big deal. You're spending. money. It might be you might not be able. to do that very often and you go maybe. you're on a date or something. The air. is polluted with like Dual Lia. Don't. get me wrong, I like Duual Lia. I. actually do. I really do. but just not. there, you know, and and it's become. such an epidemic. It's like it's. difficult to go. I can't go to Green. King pubs because all of them are. playing pop music. And these pubs are.

like the most they're beautiful. Like. these these Victorian like wooden like. ancient they've got these histories. about them on the menus. They're. boasting about how like you know there's. like the I think it's called the. Salsbury which I wrote about in in. central London which has this famous. history. It's where someone proposed to. someone or other. It's got all this. stuff and you look at the images and. it's this ornate beautiful chandelier. type stuff and if if I showed you the. image and said now just what music do. you imagine is playing. >> you know somebody walks into a. restaurant like that.

>> and says you know what this really needs. is like when I went in there they were. playing kids by Robbie Williams and. Kylie Manog and I'm just like [laughter]. >> seriously you know it it really gets my. nerves so I would I would probably do. that. >> That's one of my favorite answers. Alex, thank you so much. Such a treat. Appreciate you mate. >> Thanks. That's been fun. If you love. this episode, you'll enjoy my interview. with Dr. Daniel Aemon on how to change. your life by changing your brain. >> They don't do things until someone's mad. at them to get it done. They need stress.

in order to get stuff done.