The strongest arguments for and against the existence of God | Alex O'Connor: Full Interview
In the compelling interview titled “The Strongest Arguments for and Against the Existence of God,” philosopher Alex O’Connor dives deep into the intricate questions surrounding belief, morality, and the universe’s foundational principles. O’Connor articulates the allure of existential meaning, positing that while many find comfort in the idea of a grand purpose, reliance solely on random chance leaves a sense of void.
Central to his discussion is the “first cause” argument, which he explains through a nuanced analysis of hierarchical causality. He contrasts traditional notions of causation with the idea that everything necessitates an underlying cause rooted in necessity; a perspective that dismisses infinite regress as untenable.
However, he acknowledges the powerful counterargument: the problem of suffering. O’Connor examines how the existence of a benevolent deity appears at odds with the overwhelming suffering observed in the world, thereby challenging conventional religious beliefs.
Furthermore, he explores nihilism, emphasizing the emotional undercurrents that guide our moral compasses. Emotivism emerges as a key theme, suggesting that moral judgments are reflections of our emotional responses rather than objective truths.
Ultimately, O’Connor invites viewers to grapple with their beliefs about God and morality, encouraging a profound exploration of their implications in our lives. This thought-provoking discussion provides a rich foundation for anyone seeking to understand the philosophical landscape of belief.
Watch the video by Big Think
Author Video Description
Become a Big Think member to unlock expert classes, premium print issues, exclusive events and more: https://bigthink.com/membership/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=yt_desc
“I think that there are very good arguments to believe that there are some kind of foundational principle of the universe, some necessarily existing being, some first cause.”
Subscribe to Big Think on YouTube ► https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCvQECJukTDE2i6aCoMnS-Vg?sub_confirmation=1
Up next, How to grow deeply happy | Jonny Thomson ► https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2WShJeNX7W8
Instead of treating belief as a private preference, philosopher Alex O’Connor examines how our moral positions shape institutions, obligations, and the ways we justify our choices.
His arguments invite a closer look at why we hold certain principles, and whether those principles survive contact with their real-world consequences.
00:00 The lure of meaning
01:15 The strongest arguments for and against the existence of God
03:38 Hierarchical causes and borrowed causal power
06:33 Sustaining causes and necessity of foundation
10:04 How classical thinkers framed the first cause
14:27 Suffering as the challenge to God
17:42 Between classical theism, deism, and atheism
20:58 Understanding nihilism and the human condition
24:36 Self-justifying motives and meaning
28:00 Meaning in a materialist world
31:41 Ecclesiastes and the first nihilist
36:38 Why stories explain what logic can’t
48:55 Emotion’s grip on belief
54:20 How emotivism shapes ethics
1:05:18 Where morality meets emotion
Read the video transcript ► https://bigthink.com/series/full-interview/first-cause-argument/?utm_source=youtube&utm_medium=video&utm_campaign=youtube_description
© Freethink Media Inc., All Rights Reserved.
———————————————————————————-
Go Deeper with Big Think:
►Become a Big Think Youtube Member
Get exclusive classes and early, ad-free access to new releases without leaving Youtube. https://www.youtube.com/@bigthink/membership/
►Become a Big Think Web Member
Get the entire Big Think Class library, premium print issues, live events, and more.
►Subscribe to Big Think on Substack
Get all of your favorite Big Think content delivered to your inbox.
https://bigthinkmedia.substack.com/subscribe/
———————————————————————————-
About Alex O’Connor:
Alex O’Connor, also known as Cosmic Skeptic, is an English public speaker and content creator recognized for his work on philosophy, ethics, religion, and secularism. He hosts the podcast Within Reason
About Big Think
Big Think is the leading source of expert-driven, actionable, educational content — with thousands of videos, featuring experts ranging from Bill Clinton to Bill Nye, we help you get smarter, faster. Get actionable lessons from the world’s greatest thinkers & doers. Our experts are either disrupting or leading their respective fields.
Video “The strongest arguments for and against the existence of God | Alex O'Connor: Full Interview” was uploaded on 11/27/2025 to Youtube Channel Big Think

































Superb Video.
Some philosophers do philosophy in hopes to bring about some good. Some do it as a hobby, an interesting mental exercise.
Which one does Alex sound like?
sorry why cant an infinite causal chain exist? i dont see a contradiction
40:04 the fact that I understood the Hebrew word cuz I speak Arabic with a Syrian accent is blowin me mind up 😂😮 and we use that word in everyday conversation and yes I think the translation is correct
I'm not sold on emotive theory because as a longtime meditator I've experienced that thoughts arise first, followed by emotions. The thoughts are so fast that they often go unnoticed. It's just easier to notice emotions 😊
Surely there's a god, otherwise how would Alex get paid?
1 hour and 26 minutes. What a narcissist. You think people got time for that?! This video is going in my trash bin.
I think all First Cause like arguments are really pointless. The Universe is a mystery, we are not quite sure where it came from. So, you say that obviously there must be something separate called "God" who explains the Universe. Well, you have replaced one mystery with another, so what does it really get you? OH, but now you get to say "God exists" and from there you start arguing that "God" by the way has a bunch of other fortunate attributes.
I would disagree that there is "a lot" that Christianity got right. I also don't think you should give Christianity credit for its moral philosophy as a whole. Sure, there are some nice parts, but there are also some troublesome parts. The New Testament is generally an improvement on the Old Testament, but that is not saying much. But Christianity as a core premise says that everybody is full of sin, and need to ask Jesus for forgiveness, lest they be judged and sentenced to eternal torment in Hell. This is foundational to Christianity, and it makes the whole religion morally flawed. Jesus believed in Hell and the Old Testament, which makes Jesus morally flawed.
I do think trying to view morality through the lends of philosophy is a big mistake. Morality is a social construction. Which is not to say that it is arbitrary. Since the real goal of morality is to make living with other people more tolerable, it should be no surprise that certain principles keep popping up. I can't see a group of people getting together and agreeing that stealing from each other is OK.
Childish games. Grow up, will you? There are no "arguments" for or against God. You can't prove anything here. Wittgenstein got it right…
SPLIT BRAIN PATIENTS!
But Alex, why do you never talk about people with DID? Split brain strangeness abounds.
Does a rock suffer? Do things that are not self-aware suffer? Doesn’t it take a conscious self aware thing to create a category of something suffering? If I am unaware of my suffering do I suffer?
That's not "why" the glass of water is there. That's a "how". What are you talking about Alex?
I'm surprised that Alex ascribes a lot of plausibility that there is a "being" who exists that causes the whole universe. Why is it a being, and not just a "cause"? Why assume the cause is a "who" and not just an "it"?
If there is a first, or primary, cause for existence, is there also a first, or primary, cause for the ultimate question of why?
Metaphysics are outside the purview of proof. I think there is a more important question for humanity – does belief in a benevolent universe or creator improve the lives, health and happiness of believers? Like the effects of meditation, this is measurable.
classical physics is all horizontal causation. The hierarchical causation is an emerging phenomenon or illusion, unless the past is also real and is entangled to the present, which is the block Universe. this block universe where time started both ways makes more sense to me because it doesn't lead to breakdown of the model (singularity). BTW an infinite past doesn't make sense. infinity is only an imaginary mathematical concept.
We see in nature cause and effect but at a fundamenta level they are interactions between quantum objects (or particles but not classical. So there is an evolution in time of a system that encompases the whole universe not cause and effect, but we want a cause for the Universe :). Maybe you feel the need of an initiator, but that is just because of our intuition. There was never a state of nothingness then an universe popped up. That's just a human fantacy. I mean that's how I view this. The block universe is just in existence and not a matter of a master time. Einstein showed us time is not what it seems. The master time can only be imagined and we can put this block inside it, but it doesn;t exist.
This hierarchical causation seems to have problems. Consider a video game, it is fundamentally a mathematical program that produces numbers that the computer decodes into audio and video. A video game is fundamentally a mathematical object being decoded. If a character in the video game is holding an object and the object isn't falling because of the internal physics, the fundamental hierarchical reason for the object not falling is the mathematics of the code. In a causal way there might be a group of programmers who wrote the code down, but that is temporal causation, the hierarchical reason for the ball not falling is the mathematical one. The code is nothing mystical, it is just finite set of rules.
The pedo/cop-mustache isn’t doing him any favors.
Nihilism doesn't mean meaning doesn't exist; it just means that meaning is pointless lol
Size of the Universe is the Biggest Argument against a "God"….🙄
the glass would still exist without your arm and without gravity. I don't exactly get the explanation.
Is there a dog behind the tree? The answer could be 'yes' and it could be 'no'.
But with "Is there free will? Is there a meaning to life? Is there an objective moral?" the answers are not just no.
The more you think about it, the more you will realize: It is actually not even possible to even think of a universe, where the answers would be 'yes'.
If you think some entity outside the universe, just because it may have created you, gives you meaning, I really can't help you.
If you think that your will is neither determined nor random, than what the hell could it be?
If you think that the ants are ojectively evil when they eat your house, but you are objectively good when you kill them .. really?
The problem with philosophers like Alex is that they like to use thought experiments that are scientifically impossible (I.e., the missing arm concept to talk about it causality) in order to then make a statement about the actual state of affairs of the universe. You can’t use fantasy to make assertions about reality.