Courses by Carlo Alvaro, Ph.D.
This course teaches the basics of logical thinking: deduction vs. induction, argument form, and l... more This course teaches the basics of logical thinking: deduction vs. induction, argument form, and logical fallacies. 5 video lessons191 views
Videos by Carlo Alvaro, Ph.D.
In this interview, I talk with Cameron Bertuzzi of Capturing Christianity about my recently publi... more In this interview, I talk with Cameron Bertuzzi of Capturing Christianity about my recently published work on the Evil God Challenge. Is an Evil God just as reasonable as a Good God? My answer is no. 155 views
Papers by Carlo Alvaro, Ph.D.
CRC Press eBooks, Dec 12, 2023
Filosofija-sociologija, Sep 4, 2023
Individual relativism, also known as ethical subjectivism, is an attractive theory about morality... more Individual relativism, also known as ethical subjectivism, is an attractive theory about morality. It argues that morality is a matter relative to the individual in a way akin to personal taste. For example, subjectivists regard the ethical judgment 'Stealing is wrong' as comparable with the judgment of taste 'I dislike Brussels sprouts' . Yet, subjectivism is not nihilism. While nihilism denies the existence of moral value, duties, principles and truths, subjectivism claims that they exist, but they are subjective like taste. In this paper, I argue that ethical subjectivism ought to be rejected as it is an incoherent, undefendable, and a pernicious position.
The Global Development & Conflict Analysis, 2023
Whenever I engage in moral discussions (or listen to others having such discussions), it is often... more Whenever I engage in moral discussions (or listen to others having such discussions), it is often the case that many of my interlocutors close their arguments by uttering either or both of the following phrases, “Well, maybe such and such is wrong/right for you, but not for me” or “Who are you to judge? Right or wrong is relative.” This attitude toward morality is called moral relativism, the view according to which morality is relative to a culture or the individual. In my view, right, wrong, good, or bad are not relative to the individual or culture. If morality is relative to the norms of a society or some individuals, then slavery is moral according to the norms of a slave society, and so is sexism according to the values of a sexist culture. I argue that slavery and sexism are immoral regardless of the norms of any society. Thus, moral relativism is not only false but also pernicious. Before I defend my view, I find it necessary to explain what moral relativism is, what it is not, and why many people endorse it.
Religions, Feb 2, 2023
This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative... more This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY
Nature, 2022
The proposed benefits of cultured meat fail to track our moral intuitions because they are focuse... more The proposed benefits of cultured meat fail to track our moral intuitions because they are focused on the practical aspect of cultured meat production and consumption. A virtue-oriented approach can show cultured meat in a different light.
Religions, 2023
Logical and evidential arguments from evil are generally thought to have been rebutted by various... more Logical and evidential arguments from evil are generally thought to have been rebutted by various refutations, defenses, and theodicies. While disparate, these responses employ similar strategies to show that God has morally sufficient reasons to permit evil and suffering in the world, either to preserve human freedom, for the sake of the moral growth of human souls, or to train humans to be able to act freely without sinning once in heaven. In this paper, I defend the heaven ab initio argument from evil (HAIAFE), which demonstrates that God could have accomplished all these goals, without the need for evil and suffering, by creating human beings directly as spiritual beings in a non-physical state of eternal bliss. Moreover, I will argue that the HAIAFE is both a logical argument from evil and a “deodicy”, i.e., a vindication of a deistic god.
In this chapter, I present some compelling evidence that points to the conclusion that the human ... more In this chapter, I present some compelling evidence that points to the conclusion that the human species has a specific diet, which is a raw vegan diet of fresh fruit, tender leafy greens, and a moderate amount of nuts and seeds. Out of the hundreds of thousands of species in the world, the only one—ours—cooks food. Not surprisingly, our species is the only one that suffers from numerous maladies. In other words, the argument is that the consumption of cooked food (especially animal-based) is unhealthful and undermines our nature. I present undeniable evidence, from evolutionary science to nutrition science, showing that a raw vegan diet of mostly fruit and to some extent tender leafy greens, nuts, and seeds, is the optimal diet for our species. This conclusion naturally has profound moral implications regarding our treatment of non-human animals and the environment
Nature, 2022
The proposed benefits of cultured meat fail to track our moral intuitions because they are focuse... more The proposed benefits of cultured meat fail to track our moral intuitions because they are focused on the practical aspect of cultured meat production and consumption. A virtue-oriented approach can show cultured meat in a different light.
In this chapter, I present some compelling evidence that points to the conclusion that the human ... more In this chapter, I present some compelling evidence that points to the conclusion that the human species has a specific diet, which is a raw vegan diet of fresh fruit, tender leafy greens, and a moderate amount of nuts and seeds. Out of the hundreds of thousands of species in the world, the only one—ours—cooks food. Not surprisingly, our species is the only one that suffers from numerous maladies. In other words, the argument is that the consumption of cooked food (especially animal-based) is unhealthful and undermines our nature. I present undeniable evidence, from evolutionary science to nutrition science, showing that a raw vegan diet of mostly fruit and to some extent tender leafy greens, nuts, and seeds, is the optimal diet for our species. This conclusion naturally has profound moral implications regarding our treatment of non-human animals and the environment
Kant's argument against suicide is widely dismissed by scholars and often avoided by teachers bec... more Kant's argument against suicide is widely dismissed by scholars and often avoided by teachers because it is deemed inconsistent with Kant's moral philosophy. This paper attempts to show a way to make sense of Kant's injunction against suicide that is consistent with his moral system. One of the strategies adopted in order to accomplish my goal is a de-secularization of Kant's ethics. I argue that all actions of self-killing (or suicide) are morally impermissible because they are inconsistent with God's established nature and order. It is argued that the existence of God as the locus of moral value and duty in Kant's moral system, and not belief in God, can explain the consistency of Kant's injunction against suicide. A synergistic view is offered, which rests on three arguments: First, suicide goes against God's authority. Second, suicide is inconsistent with our self-perpetuating nature. Third, suicide goes against the rational will.
Religions, 2022
The evil god challenge is for theists to explain why a good god’s existence should be considerabl... more The evil god challenge is for theists to explain why a good god’s existence should be considerably more reasonable than an evil god’s existence. Challengers note that there is a symmetry between a good god and an evil god. Moreover, the classical arguments for a good god can prove the existence of an evil god just as well. Furthermore, theodicies can be mirrored by reverse theodicies. Consequently, the evil god challenge leads to two implications. One, if an evil god is deemed absurd, by logical symmetry, a good god must also be absurd. Two, if an evil god is not absurd, then no reason exists in favor of the existence of a good god. This paper offers two strategies to show that a good god’s existence is plausible, but an evil god’s is not. One is to argue that an evil god’s motivations for creating the world are inconsistent with its alleged nature. The other is a close examination of theodicies and reverse theodicies, which shows that no symmetry exists between them and that theodi...
Cultura, 2020
This paper is a response to Park Seungbae’s article, “Defence of Cultural Relativism”. Some of th... more This paper is a response to Park Seungbae’s article, “Defence of Cultural Relativism”. Some of the typical criticisms of moral relativism are the following: moral relativism is erroneously committed to the principle of tolerance, which is a universal principle; there are a number of objective moral rules; a moral relativist must admit that Hitler was right, which is absurd; a moral relativist must deny, in the face of evidence, that moral progress is possible; and, since every individual belongs to multiple cultures at once, the concept of moral relativism is vague. Park argues that such contentions do not affect moral relativism and that the moral relativist may respond that the value of tolerance, Hitler’s actions, and the concept of culture are themselves relative. In what follows, I show that Park’s adroit strategy is unsuccessful. Consequently, moral relativism is incoherent.
Ethics and Education, 2020
ABSTRACT Marcus William Hunt argues that when co-parents disagree over whether to raise their chi... more ABSTRACT Marcus William Hunt argues that when co-parents disagree over whether to raise their child (or children) as a vegan, they should reach a compromise as a gift given by one parent to the other out of respect for his or her authority. Josh Millburn contends that Hunt’s proposal of parental compromise over veganism is unacceptable on the ground that it overlooks respect for animal rights, which bars compromising. However, he contemplates the possibility of parental compromise over ‘unusual eating,’ of animal-based foods obtained without the violation of animal rights. I argue for zero parental compromise, rejecting a rights-oriented approach, and propose a policy that an ethical vegan parent and a non-vegan co-parent should follow to determine how to raise their children.
Uploads
Courses by Carlo Alvaro, Ph.D.
Videos by Carlo Alvaro, Ph.D.
Here: https://www.routledge.com/Raw-Veganism-The-Philosophy-of-The-Human-Diet/Alvaro/p/book/9780367435394
Papers by Carlo Alvaro, Ph.D.
Here: https://www.routledge.com/Raw-Veganism-The-Philosophy-of-The-Human-Diet/Alvaro/p/book/9780367435394
An increasing number of people are alarmed by climate change and want to know how they can reduce their climate footprint, as well as lower their consumption of harmful foods, lose weight, and achieve optimal health. According to philosopher and educator Carlo Alvaro, there is an easy answer to all these goals: raw veganism. Raw Veganism is an engaging and practical guide on how to transition successfully from a cooked diet to a raw vegan diet—and remain a raw vegan for life. It explains the benefits of following a raw vegan diet, demonstrates why cooked diets are not optimal for our health, and examines which form of raw veganism is the most conducive to good health. In addition, the book shows how to transition from vegetarianism and veganism to raw.
It is often claimed that belief in god is based on faith, where faith is defined as blind trust in the absence of evidence, while non-belief is said to be grounded in rationality. I argue that this claim is inaccurate; in fact, it is the other way around. Explicit atheism is a philosophical position that affirms that there is no god and that belief in God is irrational.
In this presentation, I revisit, extend, and defend the classical Kalām Cosmological Argument in order to demonstrate that there exists rigorous logical and scientific proof for the existence of God, which shows that explicit atheism is an extreme rejection of rational evidence for God; and therefore, explicit atheism is a positively irrational position.
In this interview, Carlo tells me about what led him to become a vegan, and he explains the philosophy of Virtue Ethics and how it leads to veganism. Then we discuss why vegans should reject lab-grown meat and whether it’s problematic to consume plant-based replicas of animal products. Carlo also speaks about a particular issue that we’ll need to address in order to achieve a vegan world.
How to listen to this episode
There are two ways you can listen to this episode.
Listen to the episode on CKCU FM's website at https://cod.ckcufm.com/programs/553/51544.html.
Listen to or download the podcast from Archive.org at https://archive.org/details/afar-april-7-2021.