Free Will, Souls, and the Problem of Evil | Richard Swinburne and Alex O'Connor

- VIDEO NOTES

Richard Swinburne is an Emeritus Professor of Philosophy at the University of Oxford, and author of a number of books on the philosophy of religion, the soul, and Christianity, amongst other subjects.

- LINKS

- TIMESTAMPS

0:00 Introduction
2:09 How has philosophy at Oxford changed since the 1950s?
5:20 What is a human being?
25:27 Do we have free will?
40:12 The problem of evil
50:17 Animal suffering
58:33 Outro

- SPECIAL THANKS

As always, I would like to direct extra gratitude to my top-tier patrons:

Itamar Lev
Evan Allen
John Early
Dmitry C.
Seth Balodi
James Davis
g8speedy
James Davis
Mouthy Buddha

- CONNECT

SOCIAL LINKS:

Snapchat: cosmicskeptic

- CONTACT

Or send me something:

Alex O'Connor
Po Box 1610
OXFORD
OX4 9LL
ENGLAND

------------------------------------------

[samr]

I swear the podcast is only getting better and better keep it up

[camk]

Alex, you're the epitome of what an atheist should be: always searching, always learning, and always willing to listen to the other side. Keep up the good work!

[ReadyToHarvest]

Thanks for this video, Alex, I enjoyed listening to it very much.

[Atrohumter]

Very interesting episode. I wonder whether the whole idea of "me" is akin to the idea of a "table". We assign a name to something which, if you're a materialist, doesn't actually have a name from the "universe's perspective". I.E., a table is just a collection of atoms in a shape that is close enough to the shape and kind of something we call, with our flawed language, a "table". I think the same applies to the concept of "self" or "me".

Materialists would believe we are just a bunch of atoms and, while this is a rather crass and unhelpful answer to give to a neuro-transplant patient, it seems to capture the truth of the situation quite well.

[nuesschen]

That was really a great discussion, everything put very well and I think your moderation style is just perfect for this kind of discussions/podcast.
Consistently something to look forward to :)

[vilib]

I have just paused the video midway to express my immense gratitude for this gem you're producing and sharing in your channel

[Fotomadsen]

He all but admits that he choose to believe in free will, as that makes most sense as a theist. Major respect to him for acknowledging, he could be wrong. Alex you are an intellectual powerhouse and you are so in a very humble way. I think you are a very influential thinker. Thank you for upholding the banner of reason, curiosity and inquiry. And at such a young age too.

[chahn]

Just have to say I have been loving these interviews, and this is my new favorite podcast right now

[Wingedmagician]

One of my favorite episodes. Hope you bring on more philosophers like this.

[brunoarruda]

I can’t believe he is 88 years old. So inspiring, his mind is still quite sharp! I’m halfway through the interview and enjoying a lot. Thanks again for this kind of content, Alex!

[shassett]

Swinburn's "soul" just seems to be a placeholder for our lack of understanding about the details of emergent properties of the physical brain.

How is this not just a god of the gaps argument?

[JM-usfr]

He appeals to classical or orthodox views a bit too often. That being said, he definitely has a deep understanding of his own views. That’s quite admirable.

[nemrodx]

It is incredible the clarity and ease that Swinburne has to respond even a such advanced age. A bit slow already but in very good shape. Excellent dialogue!

[unknownsoldier]

Swinburne is simply incorrect about the brain’s atoms not being replaced. I believe he is confusing the lack of birth of new brain cells (and even this is incorrect, adult neurogenesis has been demonstrated in the olfactory bulb and hippocampus) with there not being things replaced in the brain. Cells still take in nutrients and excrete waste and use those new atoms to build new molecules and to repair their membranes and such.

[lotsofstuff]

Surely a moral choice is also dependent on the actions that caused the person to consider something being moral or immoral. I’m not quite sure a moral choice makes any difference. I realise this person has an enormous amount more qualifications than me on this subject, but I find a lot of what he is saying isn’t logically consistent.

[alexlarsen]

It's quite remarkable seeing such a distinguished and supposedly sophisticated philosopher resort to question begging in exactly the same way the lowest hanging fruit apologists do, as soon as a concrete question about the mechanics of the mind-body dualism is raised.

Question: How exactly do mind/soul and brain interact and where's the line dividing the two?
"Answer": All I need to do is assert that they DO interact.
I'm paraphrasing but only slightly.

[vinegarable]

This is brilliant! The CosmicSkeptic, Alex, is getting such eminent philosophers and scientists on. If higher animals have conscious free choice, do they also have moral responsibility for their actions?

[markfischer]

I love the conversation. I love the respect. I love the tradition that Swinburne ably represents.
I just don't find Swinburne's arguments convincing. I don't feel like he's *really* engaging with the objections offered.

[Stigtoes]

I found Richard Swinburne's reasons to support free will very unconvincing. He had to hedge his bets and find an exception every time that AO'C suggested a problem. He further explains that free will is a gift on the pure assumption that there's a giver.

[URAZKIVANER]

Personal Id is a pretty easy thing to explain and I can prove that it has nothing to do with soul. People who has the personality disorder such as Bipolarism or Schizophrenia has different characters, personalities created in their heads for them because of debatable reasons . Either protection of the brain itself for not to overdrive it or protecting the main identity. All debatable stuff. So all these personalities behave and think in a different way and most of the people have no memories of those moments when the other personalities take over . Very famous one portrayed on the movie Sybil had 16 different personalities. If you ask those personalities they are sure of their existence. And in the definition of "soul" there can only be one per body or brain lets say. So it is debunked. And this also proves that our experiences and behaviours define our personal id. The way you experience things the way you feel (amount of hormone production) creates your identity. Without experience you wouldn't be able to become you. If that was the case that we were born with souls then we wouldn't have changing personalities throughout our lives. Even in our life span our brains evolve. And we are able to change the way we feel or behave . Souls do not evolve according to the people who say they exist...