@mrluan0987: Why people mistake feelings for moral insight #alexoconnor #religiondebate #atheistvsbeliever #philosophytalks

Habesh :

Oooo talking about objective morality are we?

Elliott :

I love this deep diving into reality

sorae_96 :

He’s so hot bro. I love smart men.

Lloyd 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁷󠁬󠁳󠁿 :

Alex, I couldn't have possibly picked a worse video to watch right after smoking. I cannot deal with these ethical conundrums

mpact_dee :

I think the easiest way to understand why something is “wrong” is if everyone did it what would happen? Would the world or society be able to sustain if everyone continued to do whatever the thing is.

becca :

this is true but can be resolved/settled by just admitting that emotions are what makes us human and they can really easily go along with logic (to an extent)

FormerOffroadLover :

I dont think its wrong on any moral level

James Leprettre :

Why did bro send me this video 😭🥀

Erik Uhh Kirk :

I would absolutely love to be surrounded by people who think like Alex O’Conner. He is so well spoken and educated that he really makes for great conversation. His capacity to actually try to understand all situations is so rare in this world. I freaking love this kid.

Satire Boy :

If something is understandable doesn’t mean it’s justified

MildlyLethargic :

Conviction precedes reason.

EldenLean :

People need to realize that "feeling" something is wrong emotionally is also valid, if everyone "feels" something is wrong but can't prove it or put it into words or rationalise it, it doesn't really matter, does it? Everything doesn't need to be categorised, discussed or planned out. Sometime things just "feel" awful and that's okay, it's just another aspect of the human experience.

Peri Bathos :

Presuming materialism, I don't understand the claim of emotivism here. Is it just that we CAN characterize moral facts this way, that there are some examples like the one given where we must, or that ALL moral claims of secretly emotive. It almost sounds like the last one, but I don't understand that. It's possible to make consistent physical systems of ethics. Not complete ones, but in materialism no system including emotive or articulate systemic ethics could be complete.

Zeke :

That emotions and ethics are intertwined doesn't mean they're the same thing, nor that the latter is purely a derivative of the former. Emotions are visceral signals and ethics is about social algorithms. Sometimes those algorithms are written with those signals in mind, but not necessarily.

jess :

I love this way of thinking that doesn't make assumptions in debate

tommy_c_2040 :

Love how Alex will back any side in a fight that has logic on its side

littlewordy :

I think it’s about safety within a family.

GoldenShirt :

Why is the search for him getting humbled. He's already humble

Silence :

I think the main objective is to address stuff outside of the 'moral' stand point.See what changes

Deus Vult777 :

Infinite chimp :

It's a different kind of love.

vasilisnotopoulos :

So if I understand we make a judgment of something being wrong or not, based on the feelings we get when we encounter a fact. And then the question of ‘is it really wrong’ becomes irrelevant. We cannot know things in themselves

michael :

I’m confused as to why he’s separating seemingly universal moral instincts from utilitarianism. Seemingly universal moral assumptions do evolve via utilitarianism.