Emotivism, God, and Homosexuality – Morality Debate with Singer, Swinburne, and Frazier
For early, ad-free access to videos, and to support the channel, subscribe to my Substack: https://www.alexoconnor.com
To donate to my PayPal (thank you): http://www.paypal.me/cosmicskeptic
– VIDEO NOTES
This event, “The Mystery of Morality”, was hosted at the Royal Institution on the 12th of June, 2025.
Peter Singer (Professor of Bioethics, Princeton University), is a world-renowned utilitarian philosopher and animal rights advocate. Jessica Frazier (Fellow, Oxford Centre for Hindu Studies), is a scholar of comparative religion and Indian philosophy at the University of Oxford. Richard Swinburne (Emeritus Professor of Philosophy, University of Oxford), is a leading Christian philosopher and defender of theism.
– TIMESTAMPS
0:00 Introduction
4:06 Peter Singer Opening
7:03 Jessica Frazier Opening
10:23 Richard Swinburne Opening
16:33 Alex O’Connor Opening
21:47 How Do We Ground Ethics?
35:49 Emotions and Feeling in Ethics
41:58 Homosexuality Debate
56:27 Animal Ethics
1:08:20 Critiquing of Utilitarianism
1:17:31 QnA
– CONNECT
My Website: https://www.alexoconnor.com
SOCIAL LINKS:
Twitter: http://www.twitter.com/cosmicskeptic
Facebook: http://www.facebook.com/cosmicskeptic
Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/cosmicskeptic
TikTok: @CosmicSkeptic
The Within Reason Podcast: https://podcasts.apple.com/gb/podcast/within-reason/id1458675168
– CONTACT
Business email: contact@alexoconnor.com
Or send me something:
Alex O’Connor
Po Box 1610
OXFORD
OX4 9LL
ENGLAND
——————————————
@BrianRPaterson
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Swinburne sounds like he is off his meds, there are so many holes in his opening arguments.
Just wait until he gets to objecting to homosexual relations because it "denigrates marriage."
@MesaCraft
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
My morals made me click the like button 🤞😊👍
@teviottilehurst
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Swinburne comes from a generation that forced a man to choose chemical castration over a prison sentence because that man, Alan Turing, practised his sexuality. Be gentle on the dinosaur and his bigoted views.
@operapagana
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Mr Nietzsche was also invited to this event, but couldn't make it. I wonder what he would've said.
@AndreRodrigues-dc5ln
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
I don’t know how to explain this as english isn’t my first language, but alex said that there’s factual evidence and morality and that changing the factual premise could change the ethics/morals regarding that issue, because morality is tied to feelings.
Well, look at slavery as it was brought up.
It was only natural for them to practice it because for them it was factual that black people are inferior to european. So their morality tells them it’s right.
But as science evolves, and with it the sense of ethics too (culture obv also partakes in morality but my point is specific to science) we start to understand that biologically there isn’t anything substantial that distinguishes black people from european. Therefore, when confronted with the FACT that they are equal to us, only then their morality shifted.
maybe i’m just talking a bunch of shit and didn’t understand her point when bringing slavery
@stapidomcazfaikeurmom4935
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Why was gramps let on. Nobody who still tries to argue that gay people are bad for society should be given an audience. It's so out dated.
@jabba86
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
So refreshing to see ppl talking without strawmen red herring or any of the bs
@JoeSaia314
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
This is why women get paid less 😂
@blitzwinger999wright6
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Do you think Swinburne has ever considered that he may just be prejudiced and using his religion to justify his beliefs?
It seems he has no clear stance on homosexuality beyond “I think it’s detrimental to society because the Bible says so despite not holding the same beliefs towards other teachings such as slavery”. In all, he didn’t really strike me as someone who’s willing to open his mind to the fact that gay people might just be beneficial to society even when Frazier mentioned Thailand where it’s an ingrained part of their culture. Rather, he seems more convinced that in his own views that are supported by outdated research as well as skewed studies as well as his own observations and beliefs.
@stephenberry8658
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Bible Bashers are one of the least spiritual beings on the planet…
And maybe the Infinite Universe…
@stephenberry8658
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Three versions of GODs
Gift Of Divinity ❤
or
Guilt Of Damnation 😢
Or
Get Our Dollar 💰
The first is from the SOUL.
The second is from Religious Dogma…
The last is tax free selling of the Afterlife Insurance Policy…. Believe or Else … Hell…
@stephenberry8658
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Two versions of the BIBLE…
Book Inspired By Love Eternal ❤
Or
Bigots Instruction Book Legislating Everything 😮
Choose…
@pyrrhic8976
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Alex's view on Emotivism and morality is so interesting to me, I do think however that there's another element to it, the element that lets us apply our "boo" or "yay" to a certain situation, which would be empathy (grounded in reason that's taught as somebody grows up), like for the homeless person example, if you have no 'empathy', as in, you can't POSSIBLY imagine yourself in the homeless persons shoes, and no preconceived notion of societal scale/context (as in, a homeless person is weaker, lower than, less powerful than, etc, the passerby), you'd have no reason to give it a "boo" anymore than you would if you walked in on a bar fight, you can say "boo" because the violence of the bar fight for example leads to some internal expectation of that feeling, but if that's disconnected then it just becomes an event like any other
@Jedicake
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Every day I'm more and more convinced how dumb I am compared to Alex
@TakeMeToYourLida
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
You can always tell who’s wrong by looking at who’s triggered. I’d love to see a Christian who can speak without getting defensive, if there is one. There no room in a logical debate for emotionality. It gets in the way of effective, objective argumentation and only serves to demonstrate the holes in someone’s statements. Anyway, I disagree with them all because it seems to me that the basis of morality centers around resistance to nature. Non resistance to what is natural is the way of god/the universe. Murd*r is resistance of life. Not taking action when something inside says something is wrong, is resistance of self. In essence interfering with nature, everything that’s come about without self-aware thinking, is wrong. It all points to the idea that god/the universe is good, so if you’re going against that, you’re going against god/the universe. So let’s say someone is dangerous and needs to be stopped before more people are hurt. Resistance of them is okay, because you’re resisting their actions which are brought about by self-aware thought, even if they have some sort of problem with their mind that makes them want to hurt people. And I already explained why hurting people would be wrong in this framework. I’m continuing to explore this to see if I can think of situations where it wouldn’t work, but it seems pretty sound.
@mikeb8138
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
why is there always one nutter
@Mannipth
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
0:25 ❓ 🧠 🧐 🤔
13:18 👩🏻🏫👨🏼🏫👨🏻🏫👨🏻🏫
@casualstone920
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Jessica Frazier is a gorgeous woman 😍
@joseph-c9j1g
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
o'connor's a bored young fool. while singer is delivering his opening speech, the neatly suited, baby faced with a moustace o'connor is looking around bored, looking at his clothes, enjoying his folded leg pose – he's obviously sick and tired debating with people whose beliefs he doesn't share or take seriously anymore, a supposed intellectual who said he doesn't even like reading.
soullessly eloquent and over-confident from the familiarity of repeating himself – one of these new 'online thinkers' fascinated with their subscriptions number. he may be bored, but he is far more boring. a worthless article.
@tannermichels5451
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
I really didn't like the Christian man's explanations. In the beginning when he stated that he tends to read the Old Testament with regards or through the lens of Christ and his example, I think was brilliant and saves the reader for Evangelical Fundamentalism of literal interpretation, it forces a shift in view and expresses a type of mystery or mysticism. "Pharaoh hardened his heart and therefore God will kill every first born child that doesn't have Lamb's blood smeared over the entrance of their home" so God therefore allowed/permitted/acted in such a way that infanticide took place in a very literal way. Yet, if we shift focus to a perfect Christ in relation to an imperfect humanity we can slowly see God not as the actor of infanticide, but through Christ we see a fallen humanity, a hardened and stubborn heart, we see Moses as ourselves trying to love mercy, commanding liberty for his people, pleading for a repentant heart for pharaoh. The plagues could have existed or the seas may have actually split, but the manipulation of matter or miracle of Moses and God did not need to necessarily happen to still be true. As well, the interpretation and meaning through the lens of Christ while looking particularly at Egypt and Moses and Pharaoh will yield a completely different meaning regardless of historical context or historical criticisms. If Christ does not abolish but fulfills all of the old covenant with "love God with all your heart mind soul and strength in your neighbor as yourself", then the literal reading is not irrelevant or unimportant, but it doesn't and shouldn't be the primary theological focus of morality, ethics, or if it is true, because regardless if it is either literal or meteohorical or somewhere in-between, the meaning will continue to yield a Christocentric meaning that transcends the literal scriptures and instead translates to the soul/heart of humanity/ the reader.
His other conversation based on well if the church says this then interpret it as this… Well, I would need to disagree. There are core dogmas that are believed for salvation or core principles to prescribe to to be called Christian, but the Church has modified its moral theology over time and depending on bias can use words such as homosexuality which did not exist in the way we understand it today in 2025 as they did 4k to 6,000 years ago when the Hebrew Bible was written or even 1800 years ago when the new testament was being written, discussed and formalized. Especially in regards to Sodom and Gomorrah. The west tends to read their own world view into scripture. The East tends to allow the scriptures to speak for themselves and use Church fathers to bring further illuminations. Regardless I did not like is final answer to biblical hermeneutics
@creamOnDs
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
intro didn't have to go that hard
@Freethinkingtheist77
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
There is a lot of negativity towards Swinburne in the comments. No one on this panel would agree with the views expressed here. Only on social media could people, who know nothing of any worth, speak so condesceningly about one of the world's greatest philosophers of religion, and not see the irony.
@lenmassage1
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
That vile, immoral old hag with his god belief is disgusting. Fortunately it will not be long now.
@johanhoon2515
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Just to clarify: If I say " my god told me to kill you" – you have only two options: You believe me and thus what god told me and thus put god above morality(god might want whatever he wants, is above morality) OR Disagree and say , no it is immoral, inhuman and no god might ever want something like that in which case you put morality above god. So you either prioritize god or morality, you cannot have both, Just think about it and realize that god, religions and morality are all human inventions and products of human mind.
@Clumbob
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
1:38:20 "If the answer is yes, and I don't have time to go into the reasons why I think that might be the case…" When/where can I find Alex expounding on this?
@ABC_DEF
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
What a ghastly old homophobe Swinburne is. He thinks that you can make gay people straight by encouraging them to be straight. Utterly stupid. Most gay people were brought up with straight role models (such as their parents) and with plenty of encouragement to be straight, but still turned out gay, because that's what they were. Then he thinks that gay people can't be parents. I know two gay men who are parents, one who was married to a woman and produced two children in the normal way and one who got a surrogate mother to carry his child. The children have turned out well in both cases. So of course gay people can be parents. They can also adopt children, and often the children they adopt are those with serious problems such as disabilities whom straight couples won't adopt. Swinburne has been showered with academic honours. But he really seems very stupid here, and not a nice person at all.
@Jim1971a
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
He brought up the Bible, and then when you destroy his argument, he wants to stop talking about the Bible 😂. Nice going Alex!👏👏👏
@noreenquinn3844
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Perhaps God sees things differently.
Life is short. Everyone dies eventually in this life. Whether you die today or tomorrow and how pleasant your life is depends a lot on how your neighbour treats you and how you treat your neighbour.
Hence, the rule to love your neighbour as yourself.
About sex and same sex etc. Sex should not become a God in our lives. The male drive for sex is higher in most cases than for the woman due to testosterone ( i think).
Males seeking males are perhaps more likely to make sex a God. Anyway, Jesus said, to love God above all things. This includes above family, friends, food, sex wealth, power, etc. Anything that would detract from our love for God in a serious way, the church is likely to frown on.
The church fathers are also aware that God is love and wants us to be happy in the same way any father would.
It's a matter of balance, I guess.
Maybe the kingdom to come is more important and beautiful and straightforward.
Perhaps when you place something above God you always neglect your neighbour / society in some way.
@ScottA2345
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
If you read all of the so called Biblical prohibitions against homosexuality, and you pay close attention to the actual words, and not make assumptions, they are not actually about gay people at all. They are prohibitions concerning heterosexuals practicing homosexuality. Begin with Leviticus. It doesn't say, as most people assert, that man shall not lie with another man . . . .. The actual text is Man shall not lie with another man as he lies with a woman. Gays don't lie with women. This is a prohibition directed to heterosexuals, not gay people. The same with Paul's letter to the Romans. What Paul condemns is the actions of those who engaged in acts that were unnatural 'to them". He's talking about people who have violated THEIR nature. Look at all the so-called prohibitions and you can discern this theme. It's about violating one's nature – heterosexuals violating their natures. No where does either the Old or New Testaments talk about or prohibit gay men from engaging in acts that are natural to them.
@arth1981
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Great video but leaving the one woman on the panel out of the thumbnail is darksided.
@michaelfaulkner6607
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
Alex, I absolutely love and respect and am in complete awe of you. You continually reveal yourself to be a kind, compassionate and loving man to all people. You have an astoundingly brilliant mind. Your encyclopedia knowledge and ability to confront and debate anyone and state your position so clearly is no less than brilliant and inspiring.
You have an admiring fan here. Thank you for these engaging posts. Michael
@Vindettacon
August 5, 2025 at 2:41 am
yum
Comments are closed.