Jack Symes

Then also there's this bigger aspect of philosophy, which is like how it all hangs together in the broadest possible sense of the term. Like, let's put all of the pieces of the puzzle together from physics, biology, and the arts, and let's try and get a big picture of the world. And if we're missing a piece of the puzzle, let's have our best guess about what that piece could be.

So I take that to be the project. And so the questions that come out of that, the questions that philosophy asks are things like, why is there something, a universe, rather than nothing? No universe. Like, why? Why are the laws of nature fine-tuned for the existence of life? Where does consciousness come from?

So I take that to be the project. And so the questions that come out of that, the questions that philosophy asks are things like, why is there something, a universe, rather than nothing? No universe. Like, why? Why are the laws of nature fine-tuned for the existence of life? Where does consciousness come from?

So I take that to be the project. And so the questions that come out of that, the questions that philosophy asks are things like, why is there something, a universe, rather than nothing? No universe. Like, why? Why are the laws of nature fine-tuned for the existence of life? Where does consciousness come from?

When I make a moral statement like the Holocaust is bad, is it the same as me saying that Jonah Hill's movies are bad? Are they the same kind of statement? Is that the same bad I'm using? Right. But the big question, and to get to the multiverse now, is...

When I make a moral statement like the Holocaust is bad, is it the same as me saying that Jonah Hill's movies are bad? Are they the same kind of statement? Is that the same bad I'm using? Right. But the big question, and to get to the multiverse now, is...

When I make a moral statement like the Holocaust is bad, is it the same as me saying that Jonah Hill's movies are bad? Are they the same kind of statement? Is that the same bad I'm using? Right. But the big question, and to get to the multiverse now, is...

The big question for me and how all of my work seems to explore this fundamental question, the French-Algerian philosopher Albert Camus said the fundamental question of philosophy is whether life is or is not worth living. So my question is... What's the point of all this? Is existence on the whole a good thing? Should we be happy and pleased to be alive? And what's the purpose of life?

The big question for me and how all of my work seems to explore this fundamental question, the French-Algerian philosopher Albert Camus said the fundamental question of philosophy is whether life is or is not worth living. So my question is... What's the point of all this? Is existence on the whole a good thing? Should we be happy and pleased to be alive? And what's the purpose of life?

The big question for me and how all of my work seems to explore this fundamental question, the French-Algerian philosopher Albert Camus said the fundamental question of philosophy is whether life is or is not worth living. So my question is... What's the point of all this? Is existence on the whole a good thing? Should we be happy and pleased to be alive? And what's the purpose of life?

And so that's where the multiverse, new atheism and these arguments for theism all come in into the projects.

And so that's where the multiverse, new atheism and these arguments for theism all come in into the projects.

And so that's where the multiverse, new atheism and these arguments for theism all come in into the projects.

I don't know how they get away with saying these things. I think you get it though, right? Science splits the atom, it puts a man on the moon. So it seems like it's going to solve all these problems.

I don't know how they get away with saying these things. I think you get it though, right? Science splits the atom, it puts a man on the moon. So it seems like it's going to solve all these problems.

I don't know how they get away with saying these things. I think you get it though, right? Science splits the atom, it puts a man on the moon. So it seems like it's going to solve all these problems.

Well, that seems to be like the failure of new atheism fundamentally, right? We've got this movement in the early 2000s, Dennett, Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, who were all being critical of religion in the light of like the September 11th terrorist attack and people thinking that religion thinks as if it's though it's beyond like criticism. But then once that project started,

Well, that seems to be like the failure of new atheism fundamentally, right? We've got this movement in the early 2000s, Dennett, Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, who were all being critical of religion in the light of like the September 11th terrorist attack and people thinking that religion thinks as if it's though it's beyond like criticism. But then once that project started,

Well, that seems to be like the failure of new atheism fundamentally, right? We've got this movement in the early 2000s, Dennett, Dawkins, Harris, Hitchens, who were all being critical of religion in the light of like the September 11th terrorist attack and people thinking that religion thinks as if it's though it's beyond like criticism. But then once that project started,

Once they embark on that project and they criticize religion, there isn't really anything left there. They don't do the project of philosophy of finding the meaning in the ethics. And when they try to do it, it's lacking. Something's missing. So I see that as the reason why new atheism is going out of favor, why it's becoming unfashionable, because it can't answer those questions.