Why Do Animals Suffer?

[PeteZaHut]

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not an animal nut, and it bothers me when people places the lives of animals over those of people. Still, I recently had a pet die and it was very difficult watching him suffer at the end of his life. I was under the impression that humans experience suffering and pain as a result of our sinful nature. Animals can’t sin, so why them?

 

[Francoist]

That’s an interesting question. I’m sorry about your pet.

Do you suppose that in the pre-lapsarian state that humans did not sense pain? Pain is the body’s internal sensory information in response to some stimuli. So in the Garden, if Adam had put his hand in flame would he not have felt it? Would it not have burned him? I would argue that it is likely that Adam would receive the same information.

Suffering seems like our response to pain. But I have read that some saints, while being painfully martyred, nevertheless showed a spiritual serenity and peace. So perhaps that is what would happen: Adam would feel pain but would not “suffer” in the sense of having distress over it. Perhaps it would be somewhat more dispassionate, like a computer that recognizes that one of its systems has become disabled.

I would think that such peace would be the result of our intimate contact with God, which is beyond the ability of an animal.

As to what use it is for the animal to suffer, I would think that it would be to propose to the animal’s cognitive faculties to remove itself from the prevailing circumstances, if possible. Otherwise something that merely injured the animal would instead destroy it.

I don’t really know about all this; I’m just speculating.

 

[snarflemike]

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not an animal nut, and it bothers me when people places the lives of animals over those of people. Still, I recently had a pet die and it was very difficult watching him suffer at the end of his life. I was under the impression that humans experience suffering and pain as a result of our sinful nature. Animals can’t sin, so why them?

I think the standard answer is that our fall affected all of creation.

I think, for example, that there is no mention of us eating animals until after the fall (God’s covenant with Noah).

 

[Yehuda_Dion]

Because they aren’t above God. If God made animals incapable of suffering, He would be placing their dignity above that of His Glorious Passion (blessed be Him and His sufferings).

 

[frjohnmaryt]

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not an animal nut, and it bothers me when people places the lives of animals over those of people. Still, I recently had a pet die and it was very difficult watching him suffer at the end of his life. I was under the impression that humans experience suffering and pain as a result of our sinful nature. Animals can’t sin, so why them?

Don’t get me wrong either. Humans are rational animals. I guess they share something in common, life and death. animals live and die. So humans as well I live now but one day I will definitely die. How? God knows that. Animals are God’s created creatures. They are created for us, to be our friends and for our needs. They are just beautiful animals. All of them, in the skies, land and sea.
Suffering and death is part of human life. All people experience suffering and death. In baptism we are united with Christ and become God’s children. So suffering and death cast a different meaning in the light of our baptism. When we encounter suffering and eventually death, it is an encounter with Christ in sharing his suffering in Jerusalem carrying the cross for us and bearing the painful death on the cross which is rightly ours. So in suffering and dying we are united with Christ’s so we can rise with him in the newness of life now and its fulness in heaven - Our homeland. This is the mystery of Christian life. So you see there is always a joy in Christ. I call this the joy in suffering and death; that is, there is suffering and death but there is always a rewarding joy with,in and through Christ. :angel1: :harp: I just hope there are animals in heaven. I can’t wait for that time to come for me.

 

[The_Reginator]

You have already received a number of great answers, but I’d like to add one more point.

Beyond everything else, there is no way that we can ever really understand God’s will fully this side of heaven.

For some reason God has allowed this to happen to animals. I cannot understand it but somehow even the suffering of animals is (in some odd way to my limited understanding) God’s will. Everything that happens in the universe is either allowed by God or is God’s will. He knows all and is all loving and merciful. We cannot see the big picture.

(Maybe your witnessing of your pet’s suffering will in some way help you in your journey to sainthood.)

Some things to think about at least …

 

[Rete]

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not an animal nut, and it bothers me when people places the lives of animals over those of people. Still, I recently had a pet die and it was very difficult watching him suffer at the end of his life. I was under the impression that humans experience suffering and pain as a result of our sinful nature. Animals can’t sin, so why them?

Animals don’t experience pain in the way you do. They can feel pain. They react to pain. It’s very sad when they are in pain. But they do not have the same capacity to suffer pain as we do because they are not self-aware. Where animals only react to the stimulus of pain, persons suffering pain are aware of themselves in pain. It might seem like a trivial distinction at first, but I think if you truly consider all of the times you were in pain, if you lacked self-awareness, it wouldn’t be nearly as bad.

In that sense, I have wondered if the pain that Christ endured was far and above what the rest of us will endure because of His divine nature.

 

[RobbyS]

You have already received a number of great answers, but I’d like to add one more point.

Beyond everything else, there is no way that we can ever really understand God’s will fully this side of heaven.

For some reason God has allowed this to happen to animals. I cannot understand it but somehow even the suffering of animals is (in some odd way to my limited understanding) God’s will. Everything that happens in the universe is either allowed by God or is God’s will. He knows all and is all loving and merciful. We cannot see the big picture.

(Maybe your witnessing of your pet’s suffering will in some way help you in your journey to sainthood.)

Some things to think about at least …

In his last sermon, Bishop Sheen said something like ,suffering is like God shouting at us: wake up; you’re not in control!

 

[frjohnmaryt]

Animals don’t experience pain in the way you do. They can feel pain. They react to pain. It’s very sad when they are in pain. But they do not have the same capacity to suffer pain as we do because they are not self-aware. Where animals only react to the stimulus of pain, persons suffering pain are aware of themselves in pain. It might seem like a trivial distinction at first, but I think if you truly consider all of the times you were in pain, if you lacked self-awareness, it wouldn’t be nearly as bad.

In that sense, I have wondered if the pain that Christ endured was far and above what the rest of us will endure because of His divine nature.

Absolutely animals are different of course. Christ’s suffering is far and above human suffering. You are right in saying that. He accepted it for the forgiveness of all humanity because who he is and his mission. You are not far from the kingdom. :angel1:

 

[cornbread_r2]

Animals don’t experience pain in the way you do. They can feel pain. They react to pain. It’s very sad when they are in pain. But they do not have the same capacity to suffer pain as we do because they are not self-aware. Where animals only react to the stimulus of pain, persons suffering pain are aware of themselves in pain. It might seem like a trivial distinction at first, but I think if you truly consider all of the times you were in pain, if you lacked self-awareness, it wouldn’t be nearly as bad.

…]

William Lane Craig couldn’t have written it any better.

As I understand it, human infants up until the age of one year old or so aren’t self-aware and yet doctors still give them analgesics when they’re injured. Do they do that just to run up the hospital bill?

 

[The_Reginator]

Here’s a related thread that just started up. So far there have been some interesting responses.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=764834

 

[frjohnmaryt]

William Lane Craig couldn’t have written it any better.

As I understand it, human infants up until the age of one year old or so aren’t self-aware and yet doctors still give them analgesics when they’re injured. Do they do that just to run up the hospital bill?

You can argue from that perspective, but still that is human suffering. Don’t you think so?:angel1:

 

[Rete]

William Lane Craig couldn’t have written it any better.

As I understand it, human infants up until the age of one year old or so aren’t self-aware and yet doctors still give them analgesics when they’re injured. Do they do that just to run up the hospital bill?

What? The Evangelical apologist? What does that have to do with this topic?

We administer analgesics to infants to lessen their pain. The same reason we administer analgesics to any person or animal. What does that have to do with the capacity to fully experience suffering as a self-aware being?

 

[Francoist]

Animals don’t experience pain in the way you do. They can feel pain. They react to pain. It’s very sad when they are in pain. But they do not have the same capacity to suffer pain as we do because they are not self-aware. Where animals only react to the stimulus of pain, persons suffering pain are aware of themselves in pain. It might seem like a trivial distinction at first, but I think if you truly consider all of the times you were in pain, if you lacked self-awareness, it wouldn’t be nearly as bad.

In that sense, I have wondered if the pain that Christ endured was far and above what the rest of us will endure because of His divine nature.

A strong point. I have often thought that the consciousness of an animal must be like that of a man dreaming: things happen but there is no reflective stance that considers them systematically. You know (mostly) what to go toward and fly from, but there is little sense to it.

 

[cornbread_r2]

What? The Evangelical apologist? What does that have to do with this topic?

Craig uses essentially the same argument to explain animal suffering.

We administer analgesics to infants to lessen their pain. The same reason we administer analgesics to any person or animal. What does that have to do with the capacity to fully experience suffering as a self-aware being?

You wrote:

It might seem like a trivial distinction at first, but I think if you truly consider all of the times you were in pain, if you lacked self-awareness, it wouldn’t be nearly as bad. (emphasis mine)

If that’s true, then infants, who lack self-awareness, can get by with lots less pain relief.

 

[Rete]

Craig uses essentially the same argument to explain animal suffering. That’s probably because he learned it from the same place I did: cognitive science research.

You wrote:

It might seem like a trivial distinction at first, but I think if you truly consider all of the times you were in pain, if you lacked self-awareness, it wouldn’t be nearly as bad. (emphasis mine)

If that’s true, then infants, who lack self-awareness, can get by with lots less pain relief. They do get by with less analgesics. We don’t administer as much analgesics to infants. Did you not know this?

 

[tonyrey]

Don’t get me wrong. I’m not an animal nut, and it bothers me when people places the lives of animals over those of people. Still, I recently had a pet die and it was very difficult watching him suffer at the end of his life. I was under the impression that humans experience suffering and pain as a result of our sinful nature. Animals can’t sin, so why them?

1. Pain is a mechanism essential for survival.
2. It is unrealistic to expect it to cease functioning when the body is no longer capable of survival.

 

[cornbread_r2]

That’s probably because he learned it from the same place I did: cognitive science research

Could you cite some studies that demonstrate that non-human animals feel less physiological pain because they aren’t self-aware?

We don’t administer as much analgesics to infants. Did you not know this?

As I understand it, analgesics are administered based on body weight, so of course infants get less than adults. The question is: Do they get less because they’re not self-aware? If what you proposed is true, then infants should get even less than what might be otherwise indicated based on their weight. Now it may be true that infants suffer less *psychological *stress because they’re not self-aware, i.e. no “Woe is me!” or “Why me?”, but that doesn’t mean that they also suffer less physiological pain.

If you reply to this and if it’s not too much trouble, could you use the quote function? It simplifies responding a great deal. Thanks in advance.

 

[kingpomba]

This is related to the natural problem of evil.

Imagine this - A fawn (baby deer) is frolicking around the forest. Suddenly, there is a strike of lightning and it causes a horrible forest fire. The baby deer is horribly burnt and suffers for 3 days before death finally relieves it of its pain, why does it happen?

For other kinds of evil, like rape or murder, we can bring up the free will defense, we need to allow humans to do bad things to other humans for us to have free will. Of course, there are no humans involved here, so, it’s not any kind of solution.

An all-good God prevents evil and suffering as much as he would. Certainly, it stands to reason an all kind God would not allow such suffering, especially if there was no good reason for it at all. If God can prevent the suffering but doesn’t, it raises the question of why. Of course, for some, that leads to the conclusion that God can’t possibly be all good and the kind of God Christians believe in doesn’t exist but obviously, not everyone takes this conclusion either.

 

[Rete]

That’s probably because he learned it from the same place I did: cognitive science research

Could you cite some studies that demonstrate that non-human animals feel less physiological pain because they aren’t self-aware?

We don’t administer as much analgesics to infants. Did you not know this?

As I understand it, analgesics are administered based on body weight, so of course infants get less than adults. The question is: Do they get less because they’re not self-aware? If what you proposed is true, then infants should get even less than what might be otherwise indicated based on their weight. Now it may be true that infants suffer less *psychological *stress because they’re not self-aware, i.e. no “Woe is me!” or “Why me?”, but that doesn’t mean that they also suffer less physiological pain.

If you reply to this and if it’s not too much trouble, could you use the quote function? It simplifies responding a great deal. Thanks in advance.

You don’t know how to conduct a literature search? The problem with your question is that what you really ask is whether animals are self-aware. Humans are self-aware. There exists evidence that a few other species are self-aware. But in general, no, most animals are not self-aware.

But more to the point, if you question whether being self-aware increases suffering of pain by an order of magnitude, then a simple literature search would tell you yes. You yourself mentioned the prime example for this. Infants do not suffer pain in the same way that a self-aware child can. That doesn’t make it acceptable to deny them analgesics (that would be barbaric), but it does mean we use different criteria required to administer those analgesics to infants.

Furthermore, regardless of the fact that infants cannot experience pain in the same way as a self-aware human can experience pain, there exists plenty of evidence that exposure to excessive pain can damage development. Just like in adults, there exist reasons to administer analgesics not directly related to alleviating the immediate experience of pain. The same is true for our pets and other animals.

This would explain that a bit better and would cut to the heart of the problem with your comments: ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2352206/pdf/bmj00561-0039.pdf

This entire “argument” attempting to disprove the evidence for a lack of self-awareness in most animals remains entirely specious and irrelevant for one other reason as well. You attempted to argue against a declarative statement about the world with a normative statement. In other words, you attempted to disprove an “is” with a completely unrelated “ought”.